So what does the title of my blog mean? Basically, it stands for what my candidacy will be about, what is best for the students of the Oshkosh Area School District. That is what I believe should be the primary concern of every board member. Of course there will be disagreement as to what is best but I want the discussion to revolve around what is best for the students and their education.
The district faces a number of issues and I believe it will take board members who have a thorough understanding of the workings of the district. I have followed the school board meetings, attending a majority of meetings since the fall of 1997, including serving one term on the board from April 2001-April 2004. I not only understand school funding issues, school budgeting, and the facilities issues the district faces, I also spent 7 years volunteering at Jefferson Elementary School, not just in my children's classrooms but at every grade level in the school. I saw first hand the challenges that our teachers face every day. I watched dedicated teachers struggle to meet the needs of their students while resources dwindled. This is not a time for us vs. them politics, whether it be teachers vs. administrators, parents vs. teachers, taxpayers vs. administrators. That is not ever productive. It is time to work together to make the district the best it can be... that can only benefit our students.
So ask your questions or post your comments and encourage your friends to do the same.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Where do you stand on a 9-10, 11-12 high school? When considering boundary issues how much weight should be placed on socio-economic issues? The Oakwood children seem to have a target on them as some board members want to use them to solve perceived and or real problems in other schools. Is that fair to those children and their parents whose chose to live there? When reading other blogs those seem to be the hottest issues now.
How do you plan to handle budget issues when you have a conflict of interest in the district? At least 50% of your household income comes from that budget.
Mrs. Thiel, I would love to vote for a qualified candidate with experience. I do, however, have a problem paying someone 100% of a job they cannot perform 100% of. In the past it was determined that your husband's job within OASD prevents you from voting on budget issues. You are currently employed by CESA 6. I would think that will conflict with certain votes as well. I would like to know how you plan to overcome those limitations.
Teresa, how do you plan to earn the trust of voters who have been put in the position you refer to in your post by the actions of past Boards having been on the Board in the past?
Teresa, every elected official - I don't care who they are - encounters issues they can not vote on. I recall this did not present a problem for you in the past and I am not concerned in the least about it presenting itself as an issue this time.
Mrs. Monte refers to herself as a teacher. If those asking this type of question have concerns about your ability to vote I would have to question Mrs. Monte's as well. She may not be employed as a teacher right now, but she does call herself a teacher and she may be one in the future. Therefore should we be suspect of her motives should she be elected and end up voting on teacher related issues? I think that is a worse situation than one who votes present.
Here are my answers:
9-10 11-12 high school? Right now I'm not enamored with the idea. Unless I can be shown that this will create efficiencies and allow for more sections of classes and more opportunities for students I probably wouldn't support it.
The research I have done shows that balancing socio-economics in schools has a positive affect on the academic achievement of students from low incomes. I believe that has to be looked at and that is why I do not support moving the Jefferson attendance area to Merrill and North, because that increases the socioeconomic imbalance in our schools and I do not think that is best for our studdents. I truly believe that our students get a quality education and that if Oakwood students attended a Merrill or North they would see that is true. In many district throughout the state boundary lines are redrawn all the time and people know that they may go to this school or that school. I believe that the board must do what is best for the entire district and I have seen no research or evidence to show that moving students to a different school would harm them.
Re: the budget question. I cannot vote on the budget if the teacher's contract has not been settled. If the contract is settled I CAN vote on the budget. That is the law.
I can never vote on the teacher's contract. I have not researched the CESA 6 issue but off the top I imagine that I will not be able to vote on CESA's contract with the district. That is the law I have been and will continue to be up front about the limitations but I would point out that there is a lot more to being on the board than those votes that come around once each year. In the past I got an opinion from the Ethics Board that said I was able to vote on budget reconcilliation issues, which is what must be cut from the budget to balance it, which is where the majority of value decisions are made. The final budget vote happens after all the "major" decisions have already been decided.
I would point out that there are a number of school districts in the state that have or have had board members whose spouse is a teacher or administrator (Green Bay, Nekoosa, Fond du Lac) the manage to deal with it. AS for the paying someone 100% I'm just wondering if people out there have any idea what board members make? When Dennis McHugh was on the board I mentioned to him that I was going to keep track of the time I spent doing the board's work to see what the "hourly wage" was. He said "don't bother, I did that once... it is about 50 cents per hour). I think the current salary is around $200 per month before taxes. Yes there are a few items I will not be able to vote on but I also never missed a regularly scheduled board meeting in the 3 years I was on the board and only missed one special meeting. I also attended every Policy and Governance Committee meeting and nearly all the meetings of the other committees I sat on. I rarely missed an expulsion or a grievance, which was not the case with some board members I served with. There is nothing I can do about the conflict but I think my knowledge and experience more than makes up for the items I cannot vote on.
Anonymous 8:02pm I'm sorry I just don't understand your question, if you could be more specific I will do my best to answer you.
Thank you to those of you who posted questions. Keep them coming.
I am 8:02. I apologize for confusing you. I meant that I consider past BOE's responsible for the current state of the buildings and district finances. You were on the BOE in the past, thus... I would like to give you a fair shake, so I wanted to ask for your explanation. I am finding it hard to put my trust in one of the contributing factors to the problems we are facing. I hope that is clear enough for your to answer now.
8:02pm Thanks for the clarification. You say the past board I was on was one of the contributing factors to the situation we are in today. While I was on the board there was only one capital improvement I voted against and that was $150,000 for the North pool and at the time we had cut millions from our operating budget and I didn't believe that we could afford the $150,000. Other than that I did not vote against any recommendation the maintenance dept./Sodhexo suggested. The fact is the district needed to spend over $3.2 million every year to maintain every building we own and even that won't fix the issues an Oaklawn faces... as building built by the neighbors in the 50's below street level it floods, much action actually has been taken to try and fix the problem but sometimes things just can't be fixed. Sometimes buildings wear out, they are not all going to last forever. To spend $3.2 million per year to keep up the building would have meant cutting $2.2 million from somewhere, mainly student programs. When I was on the board I amended the tax levy resolution so the district would tax to the revenue limits that money could have been used to repair buildings and surely could have helped with some of the later budget cuts because not levying to the revenue caps, does decrease the amount you can levy in the future... I would have to double check but I believe that (besides me) only Dennis Kavanaugh voted for that amendment.
Agree with me or not on levying to the limit but that situation does illustrate that ONE board member cannot accomplish anything alone. So, beware of board candidates who promise they will save you money by doing this or that...they MUST have three other board members that agree with them and depending on what is being promised (lower health insurance costs, higher co-pays, etc.) can also require either the various unions agreement or a favorable decision in arbitration (something NO board member can deliver as these things are out of his/her control).
Before I was on the board, as the chair of the Elementary/Middle School Boundary Subcommittee, I tried to convince people that boundaries should be changed and some buildings closed rather than additions to every building that needed space but only 2 or 3 members agreed, the rest wanted to build, which gave us the failed referendum. After repeated requests asking people to come forward and say the referendum was a bad idea, and hearing nothing, I supported putting the referendum on the ballot and allowing the people to vote on the issue.
I still believe it is a mistake for a district that is in the bottom 10% in per pupil spending in the state (out of 425 school districts) to not levy to the revenue caps. I have been criticized for that but when only 39 school districts spend less per pupil than Oshkosh, there just aren't the funds to maintain both a quality education AND all of our buildings. I believe consolidating and closing some small elementary schools and some buildings that are beyond reasonable repair will allow us to get closer to maintaining all our buildings and will definitely add dollars to our operating budget.
I hope that answers your question. If there are specific things you think I should have done/ voted for or against while on the board that would have alleviated or changed the current circumstances, let me know and I will respond.
Thank you eveyone for your questions it is nice to be able to have the time to adequately answer questions (sometimes 60 seconds isn't enough time).
Unfortunately, Teresa, perception is reality. I hope you have a strong ice ax because you have a mountain of perceptions to climb before April. Good Luck.
Going back to the anonymous 1/18 1:36 question...
"The Oakwood children seem to have a target on them as some board members want to use them to solve perceived and or real problems in other schools. Is that fair to those children and their parents whose chose to live there?"
Your answer was, "The research I have done shows that balancing socio-economics in schools has a positive affect on the academic achievement of students from low incomes. I believe that has to be looked at and that is why I do not support moving the Jefferson attendance area to Merrill and North, because that increases the socioeconomic imbalance in our schools and I do not think that is best for our studdents. I truly believe that our students get a quality education and that if Oakwood students attended a Merrill or North they would see that is true. In many district throughout the state boundary lines are redrawn all the time and people know that they may go to this school or that school. I believe that the board must do what is best for the entire district and I have seen no research or evidence to show that moving students to a different school would harm them."
I don't think you are addressing the question of it being fair to Oakwood children and parents. It may benefit the low income students but how does it help the Oakwood students? You just say it doesn't harm them. I see no benefit to having my child go to Merrill or Oshkosh North. I will have two children in different high schools, a farther drive to attend high school, a new facility(Traeger) vs an old facility with lead paint and asbestos issues (merrill).
1/18 1:36 & 1/20 9:05
Fairness -- that is a tough one to address because frankly the world isn't fair. Is it fair to a child that they are born into a situation with parents who work two jobs but still don't make enough to pay the rent and provide enough food for the family? Is it fair that a child with special needs gets moved from school to school because the space is needed for "regular" students? Is it fair that to make this a better district and provide for the needs of as many students as possible some children have to go to schools that aren't their first choice? Are any of these things fair, no and I don't mean to be flip but I do tell my children this, "life is not always fair" you just need to make sure that that you make the best of any situation you are dealt". So I don't really think it is possible to be "fair" because the world is not fair, we just need to make decisions for the right reasons.
I know this isn't what some Oakwood parents want to hear, but as I said I will NOT tell you what I THINK you want to hear, I will tell you what I beleive. From my experience at Jefferson and the research I have done, I do think it is important to look at balancing socioeconomics in our schools, as we look at balancing enrollment, it is CERTAINLY not the only factor. I also believe that Oakwood is not the only area that would provide this balance, the Lakeside attendance area should also be looked at.
Well, 8:02 I guess that leaves you with only Mr. Daggett and Mrs. Monte to consider as candidates as Mrs. Bowen, Mr. Becker and I are all either former or current board members.
What specific votes did I take that contributed to either our current building situation or our current budget deficit?
What an eloquent answer to a thorny question. I sensed the authenticity in the answer, evidence of the struggle between "how things are and how we strive for them to be".
I applaud you, Mrs. Thiel for a thoughtful and impassioned look at alternative concepts. Even if "Life is not fair" we can strive to express more fairness in the way in which we live and in the way we rear our children.
It seems to me it is to everyone's advantage not to seclude ourselves into economic "ghettos" in which we deal only with persons more or less like ourselves. In such surroundings it is all too easy to LEARN to distrust those who are different in one way or another. We should be forever grateful to have our children educated within the widest possible variety of influences.
Ms. Thiel you are a voice of sanity and of reason. I hope these qualities are recognized and supported in times that are strident and dominated by voices that are often less than candid.
Great news for Lourdes and Oshkosh Christian schools if Bowen and Co. get there way. How much revenue will our school district lose for every child who leaves? Just a short time ago we were worried about losing students to area school districts. Now we are considering a plan that will guarantee it.
Post a Comment