WOW, my frustration level with so many of the comments at the board meeting tonight is extreme. Ill informed speakers, board members who do not listen, understand or even know their role!
I agree with the comments made by Dr. Lowenstein, once again the board refuses to listen to the voters who APPROVED a referendum to exceed the caps to do an additional $1.3M in building repairs. No courage by this board, very disappointing. Well if the boiler goes out at E Cook you can thank the majority of the board who voted against replacing the 55 YEAR old boilers, knowing that if they do go out the "emergency repair" will be significantly more expensive. Not to mention disruptive to the students' education since they would be displaced from their building for a minimum of 6 weeks.
A full 3 people spoke at the budget forum...lots of words, not a lot of sense. Where exactly were the people who spoke at those budget hearings in January asking the board to raise taxes to keep schools open, fix our buildings and not cut programs?
Very frustrating and disappointing evening. Not that too many seem to care.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Never Say Never
Well I said I was done blogging about the school district and now as is a woman's prerogative, I've changed my mind.
I must admit, I've become increasing cynical about this district and where it is headed. The last few weeks however I have seen some rays of hope.
The board members for the most part are interested in moving forward rather than rehashing the past. Generally board members treat each other with respect and seem willing to listen to each other. Time will tell...
I have attended the two board retreats that have been held thus far, one on finance and one on board governance. A lot of information was provided and while I'm impatient for discussion and decisions I am hopeful that will happen sooner rather than later.
I was also reserving judgement on whether the hiring of Dr. Viegut as superintendent was the right decision for the district.
I must admit, I've become increasing cynical about this district and where it is headed. The last few weeks however I have seen some rays of hope.
The board members for the most part are interested in moving forward rather than rehashing the past. Generally board members treat each other with respect and seem willing to listen to each other. Time will tell...
I have attended the two board retreats that have been held thus far, one on finance and one on board governance. A lot of information was provided and while I'm impatient for discussion and decisions I am hopeful that will happen sooner rather than later.
I was also reserving judgement on whether the hiring of Dr. Viegut as superintendent was the right decision for the district.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
LAST POST
Last night's board meeting was the last straw for me. After listening to incredibly eloquent students explain to the board what this will mean to them, with very little discussion the board unanimously dismissed the students' concerns and voted to cut 35 teachers. If each teacher teaches 5 classes that is potentially 175 fewer classes between the 2 high schools.
After following the school board for 12 1/2 years I shouldn't be surprised by this vote but I still can't believe the vote was unanimous, Schneider and Becker's votes didn't surprise me but Karen Bowen, and John Lemberger's vote did shock me, they work at a University, from their brief comments I guess they believe that it won't really end up being that may classes. I am deeply disappointed and just don't have it in me anymore to care what the board does next --- whatever it is, it won't be good. I am just biding my time till my youngest graduates (2 years) and then I can move out of this district.
I'll leave this post up for about a week then this blog will be gone. Thanks to those of you who have contributed civil comments.
Bye
After following the school board for 12 1/2 years I shouldn't be surprised by this vote but I still can't believe the vote was unanimous, Schneider and Becker's votes didn't surprise me but Karen Bowen, and John Lemberger's vote did shock me, they work at a University, from their brief comments I guess they believe that it won't really end up being that may classes. I am deeply disappointed and just don't have it in me anymore to care what the board does next --- whatever it is, it won't be good. I am just biding my time till my youngest graduates (2 years) and then I can move out of this district.
I'll leave this post up for about a week then this blog will be gone. Thanks to those of you who have contributed civil comments.
Bye
Thursday, December 10, 2009
WHO SHOULD FILL THE BOARD VACANCY?
I wish I had the answer to that question. I don't feel like there is enough information about the applicants and what their views on the major issues are. Only Mr. Lowenstein gave any indication of where he stood on the issues. I hope the board plans to interview these candidates to obtain more information. I am torn on applicants who are not interested in running for a seat on the board. I just can't decide if that is a plus or a minus. I am pleased that most of the applicants seem to genuinely care about the students and aren't trotting out the "no taxes" mantra. From what has been presented so far, I think any one of the candidates would be a more positive force on the board than some previous or current members.
So what do you think?
So what do you think?
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
WHAT SHOULD THE BOARD DO NOW?
Well I find myself without an opinion, which is very rare for me. Turns out due to the date of the resignation, the open seat will be on the April 2010 ballot... so should the board appoint someone to serve until April, or should the seat remain vacant and be filled with the #3 vote getter in the April election?
I can see pluses and minuses to both options. Any thoughts out there?
I can see pluses and minuses to both options. Any thoughts out there?
Monte has Resigned from Board of Education
I just received an update Board of Education package for the Dec. 2nd meeting and Resolution #4 reads:
*4 Acknowledgment of Board of Education Member Michelle Monte’s Resignation Board President
# 11 reads: *11 Calendar to Fill the Vacant Board of Education Member Position
I guess even Ms. Monte understands that missing that many meetings in a row makes one ineffective, I am glad she is doing the right thing in resigning. The effective date of her resignation is Nov. 24, 2009
Wonder how long it will take to get 4 votes for a replacement?
*4 Acknowledgment of Board of Education Member Michelle Monte’s Resignation Board President
# 11 reads: *11 Calendar to Fill the Vacant Board of Education Member Position
I guess even Ms. Monte understands that missing that many meetings in a row makes one ineffective, I am glad she is doing the right thing in resigning. The effective date of her resignation is Nov. 24, 2009
Wonder how long it will take to get 4 votes for a replacement?
Monday, November 30, 2009
SO MUCH FOR 100%
I know I haven't posted in almost a year...lots of reasons, my frustration at the makeup of the board, lots of time spent at my daughters' sporting events, very busy at work and just not very motivated to write.
That has now changed, two topics have me interested and motivated, this post will address the first.
When I was a candidate for the board in 2007 Ms. Monte was a candidate as well and she made a big deal in her opening and closing statements at the League of Women Voter's Forum about how she could vote on 100% of the resolutions...a dig at me.
As a guest on Eye on Oshkosh the issue came up again, here is one of Ms. Monte's quotes from the show on March 15, 2007:
“Mrs. Thiel, while very diligent – she’s been to the board meetings, she has a lot of knowledge, and she has experience – while she has all of those positive qualities, her husband’s a teacher, which means that when contracts are under negotiations, she can’t vote on the budget. She can vote on the budget reconciliation plan, but if we did the budget right we wouldn’t need the reconciliation plan, and because she works for CESA, there’s even more limitations. And as a taxpayer, that bothers me. If my tax dollars are going to pay someone to do a job, I would hope I’m getting my money’s worth. And if they have to continuously abstain from votes, I don’t feel that I am.”
I responded that my voting record was at 96 percent, to which she responded, “But you cashed 100 percent of the checks. That’s my point." She also stated on that show: "I will vote for the person that can do the entire job because that is a paid position."
Fast forward to 2009... Since Ms. Monte was elected there have been 14 regularly scheduled board meetings and Ms. Monte has missed the last 4 board meetings (29%) and yet she has cashed all her board checks up through November 11, 2009. In 3 years I never missed a regularly scheduled board meeting (and only missed one special meeting) yet she criticized me for cashing my checks. How hypocritical!
Of course I didn't vote for Ms. Monte, but if I had, I certainly wouldn't feel that I was getting proper representation. Whatever the reasons for her absence, the fact is she has not come close to voting on 100% of board resolutions. Can you imagine Ms. Monte's blog post had Mrs. Weinsheim missed as many meetings in a row?
Why is it no one seems to care that Ms. Monte appears to have better things to do than attend or at least participate in board meetings? She could at least participate by phone if it was illness that prevented her from actually attending meetings. I have heard no explanation from Ms. Monte as to why she is not attending meeting after meeting, after meeting, after meeting, after meeting. The rumor mill says it is a job out of town that is keeping her from attending meetings. I think she owes it to the voters to explain her repeated absences. Whatever the reason, don't Oshkosh voters deserve a board member who attends most if not all meetings each year rather than one who has already missed 4 meetings in a row? One of those missed meetings contained a workshop on the Superintendent Search, arguably the most important duty for board members this year.
There is a board meeting this Wed. Dec. 2nd I'll update on whether this is another missed meeting for Ms. Monte.
Any thoughts?
That has now changed, two topics have me interested and motivated, this post will address the first.
When I was a candidate for the board in 2007 Ms. Monte was a candidate as well and she made a big deal in her opening and closing statements at the League of Women Voter's Forum about how she could vote on 100% of the resolutions...a dig at me.
As a guest on Eye on Oshkosh the issue came up again, here is one of Ms. Monte's quotes from the show on March 15, 2007:
“Mrs. Thiel, while very diligent – she’s been to the board meetings, she has a lot of knowledge, and she has experience – while she has all of those positive qualities, her husband’s a teacher, which means that when contracts are under negotiations, she can’t vote on the budget. She can vote on the budget reconciliation plan, but if we did the budget right we wouldn’t need the reconciliation plan, and because she works for CESA, there’s even more limitations. And as a taxpayer, that bothers me. If my tax dollars are going to pay someone to do a job, I would hope I’m getting my money’s worth. And if they have to continuously abstain from votes, I don’t feel that I am.”
I responded that my voting record was at 96 percent, to which she responded, “But you cashed 100 percent of the checks. That’s my point." She also stated on that show: "I will vote for the person that can do the entire job because that is a paid position."
Fast forward to 2009... Since Ms. Monte was elected there have been 14 regularly scheduled board meetings and Ms. Monte has missed the last 4 board meetings (29%) and yet she has cashed all her board checks up through November 11, 2009. In 3 years I never missed a regularly scheduled board meeting (and only missed one special meeting) yet she criticized me for cashing my checks. How hypocritical!
Of course I didn't vote for Ms. Monte, but if I had, I certainly wouldn't feel that I was getting proper representation. Whatever the reasons for her absence, the fact is she has not come close to voting on 100% of board resolutions. Can you imagine Ms. Monte's blog post had Mrs. Weinsheim missed as many meetings in a row?
Why is it no one seems to care that Ms. Monte appears to have better things to do than attend or at least participate in board meetings? She could at least participate by phone if it was illness that prevented her from actually attending meetings. I have heard no explanation from Ms. Monte as to why she is not attending meeting after meeting, after meeting, after meeting, after meeting. The rumor mill says it is a job out of town that is keeping her from attending meetings. I think she owes it to the voters to explain her repeated absences. Whatever the reason, don't Oshkosh voters deserve a board member who attends most if not all meetings each year rather than one who has already missed 4 meetings in a row? One of those missed meetings contained a workshop on the Superintendent Search, arguably the most important duty for board members this year.
There is a board meeting this Wed. Dec. 2nd I'll update on whether this is another missed meeting for Ms. Monte.
Any thoughts?
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
LET'S LOOK AT SOME FACTS
FACT:
Oshkosh has the lowest tax rate of 9 comparable districts for 2007-2008 school year:
Sheboygan $10.10
Kimberly $ 9.25
Eau Claire $ 9.15
Janesville $ 8.34
Neenah $ 8.33
Menasha $ 8.25
Fond du Lac $ 8.15
Kaukauna $ 8.13
Appleton $ 7.88
Oshkosh $ 7.39
Oshkosh has 4 more Elementary Schools and 2 more Middle Schools than similar sized districts in WI--- Eau Claire, Janesville and Sheboygan all have 12 Elementary schools (Oshkosh has 16) and 3 Middle Schools (Oshkosh has 5)
Oshkosh School District mill rate in 1992 (over $15 per $1,000 equalized value)
Oshkosh School District mill rate in 2008 ($7.39 per $1,000 equalized value)
What does that mean?
I'll use my house as an example --- in 1992 my house was assessed at $39,900 which means my school tax in 1992 would have been approximately (I don't have the exact rate but I know it was over $15 so I just used $15 as the rate) $598.50 ($39,900/1,000 =39.90 X $15 = $598.50)
In 2008 my house was assessed at $73,000 which means my school tax was $539.47
Well look at that my 2008 school tax was $59.03 LESS than it was in 1992 (that isn't even accounting for inflation) [$598.50 was worth more in 1992 than it is today].
If your house was assessed at $100,000 in 1992 and $200,000 your school taxes would have been:
1992 --- $1,500
2008 --- $1,478
That is what the revenue controls have done, in Oshkosh, they have cut the mill rate by more than half. I have to wonder about those who say the school district keeps increasing taxes. The facts just don't seem to bear that out.
If you compare Oshkosh with surrounding and like-sized communities Oshkosh's tax rate is significantly lower, which means we have done more with less dollars than other districts.
Oshkosh has the lowest tax rate of 9 comparable districts for 2007-2008 school year:
Sheboygan $10.10
Kimberly $ 9.25
Eau Claire $ 9.15
Janesville $ 8.34
Neenah $ 8.33
Menasha $ 8.25
Fond du Lac $ 8.15
Kaukauna $ 8.13
Appleton $ 7.88
Oshkosh $ 7.39
Oshkosh has 4 more Elementary Schools and 2 more Middle Schools than similar sized districts in WI--- Eau Claire, Janesville and Sheboygan all have 12 Elementary schools (Oshkosh has 16) and 3 Middle Schools (Oshkosh has 5)
Oshkosh School District mill rate in 1992 (over $15 per $1,000 equalized value)
Oshkosh School District mill rate in 2008 ($7.39 per $1,000 equalized value)
What does that mean?
I'll use my house as an example --- in 1992 my house was assessed at $39,900 which means my school tax in 1992 would have been approximately (I don't have the exact rate but I know it was over $15 so I just used $15 as the rate) $598.50 ($39,900/1,000 =39.90 X $15 = $598.50)
In 2008 my house was assessed at $73,000 which means my school tax was $539.47
Well look at that my 2008 school tax was $59.03 LESS than it was in 1992 (that isn't even accounting for inflation) [$598.50 was worth more in 1992 than it is today].
If your house was assessed at $100,000 in 1992 and $200,000 your school taxes would have been:
1992 --- $1,500
2008 --- $1,478
That is what the revenue controls have done, in Oshkosh, they have cut the mill rate by more than half. I have to wonder about those who say the school district keeps increasing taxes. The facts just don't seem to bear that out.
If you compare Oshkosh with surrounding and like-sized communities Oshkosh's tax rate is significantly lower, which means we have done more with less dollars than other districts.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Cost of the Referendum
There is a story in the Sunday, January 25, 2008 Northwestern that states that the total cost of the referendum, in year one, if all 3 questions pass would be about $52 on a $100,000 home. As I suspected, less than one month of cable television or two months of the dish and a whole lot less than the new ipod touch.
I don't know how many different ways to let people know that teachers do NOT get a 3.8% pay raise, that if the district offers teachers less than a 3.8% package the teachers can go to arbitration and the district risks losing and if they lose they must give the teachers whatever they asked for in the last proposal that went to arbitration (as well as paying arbitration fees, lawyers fees etc.). It is unfortunate that posters who do NOT at all understand the QEO continue to post misinformation. Moderating comments saves me time in deleting these erroneous posts before people read them.
Back to the referendum. I do not think $52 on a $100,000 home is outrageous, my home is not even valued at $100,000 but I could certainly find $52 a YEAR in my budget. And before you all go on and on about those on "fixed incomes" my 80 year old mother is on a "fixed" income but you know what? Her SS income goes up every year and more than $52... by the way she lives in Milwaukee in a home valued at about $125,000 and her property taxes are well over $3,000 and she manages to pay them. The taxes in Oshkosh don't even come close to that figure.
I must say, reading the comments on the NW regarding the cost of the referendum makes me want to move, then I remind myself that the posters are NOT representative of Oshkosh in general, just a small negative segment of Oshkosh.
Now if you have questions about specifics of the referendum or comments about the capital improvement priorities, please post. If you want to go on about "extravagant teacher pay" find somewhere else to post, I've read more than my fill of those and won't be posting them.
I don't know how many different ways to let people know that teachers do NOT get a 3.8% pay raise, that if the district offers teachers less than a 3.8% package the teachers can go to arbitration and the district risks losing and if they lose they must give the teachers whatever they asked for in the last proposal that went to arbitration (as well as paying arbitration fees, lawyers fees etc.). It is unfortunate that posters who do NOT at all understand the QEO continue to post misinformation. Moderating comments saves me time in deleting these erroneous posts before people read them.
Back to the referendum. I do not think $52 on a $100,000 home is outrageous, my home is not even valued at $100,000 but I could certainly find $52 a YEAR in my budget. And before you all go on and on about those on "fixed incomes" my 80 year old mother is on a "fixed" income but you know what? Her SS income goes up every year and more than $52... by the way she lives in Milwaukee in a home valued at about $125,000 and her property taxes are well over $3,000 and she manages to pay them. The taxes in Oshkosh don't even come close to that figure.
I must say, reading the comments on the NW regarding the cost of the referendum makes me want to move, then I remind myself that the posters are NOT representative of Oshkosh in general, just a small negative segment of Oshkosh.
Now if you have questions about specifics of the referendum or comments about the capital improvement priorities, please post. If you want to go on about "extravagant teacher pay" find somewhere else to post, I've read more than my fill of those and won't be posting them.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Referendum Issues
I have moved some comments from the "Candidates" thread to this one as they are about the referendum not the candidates. I would really like people to focus on the issues (using facts would be great but I know many bloggers don't want to bother with that). If the post isn't on topic I'll delete, if that becomes too much work I'll have to go to moderating (which I really don't want to do and if that becomes too cumbersome I'll just shut the blog down).
This thread is to post questions, concerns or opinions you have about the proposed referendum, I know there isn't a lot of information out there right now but I expect that to change very soon. We don't need a rehashing of the Ryf Road site, that has been decided, that will be where a new school, if approved, is located. So maybe posters could focus on the other two questions, and if you don't support those, please explain how you think the district should go about fixing up its buildings? Should any buildings be closed? How would YOU decide which buildings to close? Which buildings to repair? Which buildings aren't worth repairing?
If you want to talk about candidates for the School Board, please post on that thread. If you just want to post nasty things, find a different blog.
This thread is to post questions, concerns or opinions you have about the proposed referendum, I know there isn't a lot of information out there right now but I expect that to change very soon. We don't need a rehashing of the Ryf Road site, that has been decided, that will be where a new school, if approved, is located. So maybe posters could focus on the other two questions, and if you don't support those, please explain how you think the district should go about fixing up its buildings? Should any buildings be closed? How would YOU decide which buildings to close? Which buildings to repair? Which buildings aren't worth repairing?
If you want to talk about candidates for the School Board, please post on that thread. If you just want to post nasty things, find a different blog.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
School Board Election
The previous thread has way too many posts and very little discussion. One of the last posts I am moving here. I found it just a little interesting that the "announcement" would end up on MY blog rather than the candidate's.
Here is the post:
Anonymous said...
A friend forwarded this email to me. All I can say is not again.
Good Morning,
Kent and I have weighed the pros and cons of one more run at the BOE. Due to health concerns, I was hesitant to consider a campaign as I do not feel I can give it everything I have in the past. I am not able to do door to door and put up signs primarily. Kent is not able to help as he has to travel to Virginia with his job. Not to mention we have four children.
After much discussion and giving consideration to our school district's current situation, I have decided that it would be a bigger crime not to run. With your help, I can run a great campaign. I believe that there is a better way to address our district's challenges and with common sense budgeting and conservative approaches, we can turn this school district around and take care of our schools.
I am asking for your help. I need to collect 100-200 signatures by the end of the month. I would appreciate if you could take 2-3 sheets and fill at least 1-2. Let me know if you can take nomination papers and I will drop them off for you by the end of this week.
Also, if you could help with my campaign, let me know what you would like to do.
Thanks much and Merry Christmas.
Michelle Monte
Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:44:00 PM CST
It still remains to be seen whether there will be enough candidates to require a primary.
I just hope at least a few of the candidates will have specifics on EXACTLY what they would do differently... saying one will not raise taxes just isn't enough for me. If you won't levy to the limit, then where will you cut/save to balance the budget? If you are going to put $3M in the operating budget to repair our buildings where will those dollars come from. Stop hinting around... if your plan is to offer the unions 2% packages say that, if you plan to increase class sizes say so, I'm tired of people campaigning by having great sound bites but NO substance. Of course they don't want to offend any voters so I'm sure for most their "plans" will be very short on details. Why voters tolerate that is beyond me. I'm just hoping I'll be able to find 3 candidates to vote for.
Once Tues comes we should know who the candidates are. I hope we can have a REAL discussion of the issues the district faces and the "plan" each candidate comes with.
Here is the post:
Anonymous said...
A friend forwarded this email to me. All I can say is not again.
Good Morning,
Kent and I have weighed the pros and cons of one more run at the BOE. Due to health concerns, I was hesitant to consider a campaign as I do not feel I can give it everything I have in the past. I am not able to do door to door and put up signs primarily. Kent is not able to help as he has to travel to Virginia with his job. Not to mention we have four children.
After much discussion and giving consideration to our school district's current situation, I have decided that it would be a bigger crime not to run. With your help, I can run a great campaign. I believe that there is a better way to address our district's challenges and with common sense budgeting and conservative approaches, we can turn this school district around and take care of our schools.
I am asking for your help. I need to collect 100-200 signatures by the end of the month. I would appreciate if you could take 2-3 sheets and fill at least 1-2. Let me know if you can take nomination papers and I will drop them off for you by the end of this week.
Also, if you could help with my campaign, let me know what you would like to do.
Thanks much and Merry Christmas.
Michelle Monte
Saturday, January 3, 2009 3:44:00 PM CST
It still remains to be seen whether there will be enough candidates to require a primary.
I just hope at least a few of the candidates will have specifics on EXACTLY what they would do differently... saying one will not raise taxes just isn't enough for me. If you won't levy to the limit, then where will you cut/save to balance the budget? If you are going to put $3M in the operating budget to repair our buildings where will those dollars come from. Stop hinting around... if your plan is to offer the unions 2% packages say that, if you plan to increase class sizes say so, I'm tired of people campaigning by having great sound bites but NO substance. Of course they don't want to offend any voters so I'm sure for most their "plans" will be very short on details. Why voters tolerate that is beyond me. I'm just hoping I'll be able to find 3 candidates to vote for.
Once Tues comes we should know who the candidates are. I hope we can have a REAL discussion of the issues the district faces and the "plan" each candidate comes with.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Referendum Proposal
At the September 24 Oshkosh School Board Meeting the referendum questions were discussed. The VERY short story is the interim superintendent recommended a 3 question referendum with the questions looking something like the following -- dollar amounts are NOT set in stone, just a place to start discussions:
Question 1: New Oaklawn/Sunset probably on Ryf Road $15,000,000 (approx. amount based on Feb. 2008 figures)
Question 2: Exceed Revenue Caps by $1,300,000 per year for 5 years for deferred maintenance projects
Question 3: Exceed Revenue Caps by $500,000 per year for Capital Action plans (one example of this might be secured entrances at all schools)
Here is a link to the entire board packet, the referendum information starts on page 38
Here are the deferred maintenance projects:
Projects Prioritized from Deferred Maintenance History
2009
All Schools
Electrical/Lighting Improvements, Upgrading fixtures, emergency & gym lighting $653,400
P.Tipler:
HVAC
A/C $ 275,000
Roof $ 225,640
All Other
North Cylinder repair of elevator $ 80,000
Total $1,234,040
2010
E. Cook Media Center
Roof $75,000
Roosevelt
Boiler $975,000
West (1 of 2)
Bleachers $195,000
W. Stanley (1 of 3)
Windows $55,000
Total $1,300,000
2011
S. Park
Boiler & DDC controls $1,350,000
Total $1,350,000
2012
District Wide
Roof repair/replace $750,000
W. Stanley (2 of 3)
Windows $55,000
West (2 of 2)
Bleachers $195,000
Merrill (1 of 2)
HVAC upgrade $315,000
Total $1,315,000
2013
District Wide
Roofs $750,000
J. Shapiro
HVAC $150,000
W. Stanley (3 of 3)
Windows $55,000
Merrill (2 of 2)
HVAC upgrade $400,000
Total $1,355,000
One thing really jumped out at me... the cost of a new boiler at South Park $1.3 MILLION ... Should the deferred maintenance question fail, I shudder to think what the cuts would look like if the $1.3 Million cost of a new boiler was taken out of operating funds.
A few people have posted on various blogs that the district should fund all its maintenance and capital improvements out of its operating funds. I wonder how many homeowners have enough money in their "operating" budgets to replace their furnace should it go out? I would imagine most would either take out a loan or take the money from a savings account.
So what do you think? Do you like 3 questions vs. just one or two? Would you support any or all of the questions? Why or why not?
Question 1: New Oaklawn/Sunset probably on Ryf Road $15,000,000 (approx. amount based on Feb. 2008 figures)
Question 2: Exceed Revenue Caps by $1,300,000 per year for 5 years for deferred maintenance projects
Question 3: Exceed Revenue Caps by $500,000 per year for Capital Action plans (one example of this might be secured entrances at all schools)
Here is a link to the entire board packet, the referendum information starts on page 38
Here are the deferred maintenance projects:
Projects Prioritized from Deferred Maintenance History
2009
All Schools
Electrical/Lighting Improvements, Upgrading fixtures, emergency & gym lighting $653,400
P.Tipler:
HVAC
A/C $ 275,000
Roof $ 225,640
All Other
North Cylinder repair of elevator $ 80,000
Total $1,234,040
2010
E. Cook Media Center
Roof $75,000
Roosevelt
Boiler $975,000
West (1 of 2)
Bleachers $195,000
W. Stanley (1 of 3)
Windows $55,000
Total $1,300,000
2011
S. Park
Boiler & DDC controls $1,350,000
Total $1,350,000
2012
District Wide
Roof repair/replace $750,000
W. Stanley (2 of 3)
Windows $55,000
West (2 of 2)
Bleachers $195,000
Merrill (1 of 2)
HVAC upgrade $315,000
Total $1,315,000
2013
District Wide
Roofs $750,000
J. Shapiro
HVAC $150,000
W. Stanley (3 of 3)
Windows $55,000
Merrill (2 of 2)
HVAC upgrade $400,000
Total $1,355,000
One thing really jumped out at me... the cost of a new boiler at South Park $1.3 MILLION ... Should the deferred maintenance question fail, I shudder to think what the cuts would look like if the $1.3 Million cost of a new boiler was taken out of operating funds.
A few people have posted on various blogs that the district should fund all its maintenance and capital improvements out of its operating funds. I wonder how many homeowners have enough money in their "operating" budgets to replace their furnace should it go out? I would imagine most would either take out a loan or take the money from a savings account.
So what do you think? Do you like 3 questions vs. just one or two? Would you support any or all of the questions? Why or why not?
Thursday, September 11, 2008
What is the Role and Responsibility of Elected Officials?
When I served on the school board I attended a conference where the speaker was a Philip Boyle (at the time a professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and now a private consultant) he was an excellent speaker who really understood the role of elected officials. That conference clarified for me, my role as a school board member and helped in some ways to explain why the BOE had (and still has) such difficulties making decisions at times. This article explains very clearly what the role of elected officials should be.
Here are some excerpts from the above article:
We call them public values, because they come into play when we act or are affected as citizens. We can group them into four core values (Note: for more detailed discussions of these values and how they shape public policy and political theory, see O'Toole, Stone, Okun, and Brinkley et al.):
Liberty, which includes freedom, choice, access, autonomy, mobility, openness, transparency, individual rights, voluntary, opportunity, individuality, exemptions, privacy, due process, independence, personal responsibility, self-determination, and self-sufficiency.
Prosperity, which includes economy, efficiency, growth, productivity, profit, cost reduction, development, incentives, competition, consolidation, centralization, privatization, standardization, specialization, performance measurement, benchmarking, return on investment, using market rules to make decisions, and quantity of life.
Equality, which includes fairness, justice, tolerance, acceptance, diversity, equity, inclusion, representation, equal rights, equal opportunity, equal treatment, equal results, grandfathering, and a level playing field.
Community, which includes safety, security, a sense of connection and belonging to the people and places where we live and work, a sense of place and identity, health, aesthetics, preservation, restoration, conservation, tradition, customs, the sacred, uniformity, social and moral order, and quality of life.
As shown below, each of these public values represents a competing vision for public education:
Public Education and Liberty
Let parents choose schools, control how education dollars are spent
Charter, magnet, cyber schools
Private schools, home schooling
Open enrollment and transfers
Academic freedom, freedom of speech
Local control and governance
Open meetings, transparency, public input
Public Education and Prosperity
Meet global standards
Further economic progress
Compete in 21st century workplace
Career preparation, real-world learning
Apply market principles to education and schools
Treat parents as consumers
Continuous school improvement
Measurement and certification
Commercialization
Operate schools like a business
Public Education and Equality
Equitable funding
Equal opportunity
Eliminate race, gender, class, ethnic, and cultural biases
Teach all history and cultures
All courses and sports available to all students
Alternative, special, bi-lingual education
Free and reduced breakfast/lunch programs
Non-discriminatory policies governing public use of school facilities
Close achievement gaps
Title IX
Public Education and Community
Meet social and emotional needs
All children learn together
Avoid competition, ranking, social sorting
Strengthen families and communities
Smaller classes, neighborhood schools
Art, music, civics, character education, service learning
Health, exercise, diet, nutrition, physical education
Drug testing, dress codes, zero tolerance
Safe, clean, secure, comfortable, welcoming schools
Raise children, don't just teach children
Save recess!
While there are statements I agree with in all 4 values, my values run much more to the Community/ Equality set than the other 2 (though there are one or two statments in the community set that I do not agree with) as I think anyone can see there are others who were or are on the board whose values run much more to Prosperity and somewhat to Liberty. As the article indicates, no one value is better than any other, the key for elected officials is to balance all the values and leave everyone better off than before they started. It is a tall order and since many officials are not even aware of the struggle with these values, this is rarely the approach taken.
An educational system isn't worth a great deal if it teaches young people how to make a living but doesn't teach them how to make a life. -- Unknown
Private organizations and institutions can promote one value over the others, but government cannot. We expect the American Civil Liberties Union to promote liberty, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People to promote equality, the YMCA and Sierra Club to promote community, and the chamber of commerce to promote prosperity. But only one institution -- government -- is responsible for protecting and promoting all four public values. We prevent anarchy and tyranny, as the Founders intended, by making room for each public value in the public sphere.
And we ask our public officials -- both elected and appointed -- to make good public choices by balancing these values. In this context, public school leadership is not about power, authority, or public opinion. As James Madison might have put it, school boards and administrators are charged with refining and enlarging the public views so that they may best discern the true public interest.
So what do you think? Does this make sense? Does it explain to some degree why the BOE gets stymied? Please keep the discussion ON TOPIC... I will delete ALL posts that stray from this topic.
Here are some excerpts from the above article:
We call them public values, because they come into play when we act or are affected as citizens. We can group them into four core values (Note: for more detailed discussions of these values and how they shape public policy and political theory, see O'Toole, Stone, Okun, and Brinkley et al.):
Liberty, which includes freedom, choice, access, autonomy, mobility, openness, transparency, individual rights, voluntary, opportunity, individuality, exemptions, privacy, due process, independence, personal responsibility, self-determination, and self-sufficiency.
Prosperity, which includes economy, efficiency, growth, productivity, profit, cost reduction, development, incentives, competition, consolidation, centralization, privatization, standardization, specialization, performance measurement, benchmarking, return on investment, using market rules to make decisions, and quantity of life.
Equality, which includes fairness, justice, tolerance, acceptance, diversity, equity, inclusion, representation, equal rights, equal opportunity, equal treatment, equal results, grandfathering, and a level playing field.
Community, which includes safety, security, a sense of connection and belonging to the people and places where we live and work, a sense of place and identity, health, aesthetics, preservation, restoration, conservation, tradition, customs, the sacred, uniformity, social and moral order, and quality of life.
As shown below, each of these public values represents a competing vision for public education:
Public Education and Liberty
Let parents choose schools, control how education dollars are spent
Charter, magnet, cyber schools
Private schools, home schooling
Open enrollment and transfers
Academic freedom, freedom of speech
Local control and governance
Open meetings, transparency, public input
Public Education and Prosperity
Meet global standards
Further economic progress
Compete in 21st century workplace
Career preparation, real-world learning
Apply market principles to education and schools
Treat parents as consumers
Continuous school improvement
Measurement and certification
Commercialization
Operate schools like a business
Public Education and Equality
Equitable funding
Equal opportunity
Eliminate race, gender, class, ethnic, and cultural biases
Teach all history and cultures
All courses and sports available to all students
Alternative, special, bi-lingual education
Free and reduced breakfast/lunch programs
Non-discriminatory policies governing public use of school facilities
Close achievement gaps
Title IX
Public Education and Community
Meet social and emotional needs
All children learn together
Avoid competition, ranking, social sorting
Strengthen families and communities
Smaller classes, neighborhood schools
Art, music, civics, character education, service learning
Health, exercise, diet, nutrition, physical education
Drug testing, dress codes, zero tolerance
Safe, clean, secure, comfortable, welcoming schools
Raise children, don't just teach children
Save recess!
While there are statements I agree with in all 4 values, my values run much more to the Community/ Equality set than the other 2 (though there are one or two statments in the community set that I do not agree with) as I think anyone can see there are others who were or are on the board whose values run much more to Prosperity and somewhat to Liberty. As the article indicates, no one value is better than any other, the key for elected officials is to balance all the values and leave everyone better off than before they started. It is a tall order and since many officials are not even aware of the struggle with these values, this is rarely the approach taken.
An educational system isn't worth a great deal if it teaches young people how to make a living but doesn't teach them how to make a life. -- Unknown
Private organizations and institutions can promote one value over the others, but government cannot. We expect the American Civil Liberties Union to promote liberty, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People to promote equality, the YMCA and Sierra Club to promote community, and the chamber of commerce to promote prosperity. But only one institution -- government -- is responsible for protecting and promoting all four public values. We prevent anarchy and tyranny, as the Founders intended, by making room for each public value in the public sphere.
And we ask our public officials -- both elected and appointed -- to make good public choices by balancing these values. In this context, public school leadership is not about power, authority, or public opinion. As James Madison might have put it, school boards and administrators are charged with refining and enlarging the public views so that they may best discern the true public interest.
So what do you think? Does this make sense? Does it explain to some degree why the BOE gets stymied? Please keep the discussion ON TOPIC... I will delete ALL posts that stray from this topic.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
A Little GOP Hypocrisy
I moved the link here from a different post... thanks anonymous...
I found this to be quite amusing, especially O'Reilly's comments on teen pregnancy...
I found this to be quite amusing, especially O'Reilly's comments on teen pregnancy...
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Vocational Education or College Education?
I found this article from the Washington Post very interesting please read the article (note the civility of the disagreement) and then join the discussion.
For those of you who don't want to read the article but want to participate in the discussion... basically the article was a discussion based on Chris Peters plan that would give both college-oriented and job-oriented students an equal chance. His 3 step plan is as follows:
Step 1:
Condense all universal high school requirements down to those which can be completed within two years and which consist of standards that are essential for the development of an informed citizenry and ensure that the student has the basic skills and knowledge base necessary for life-long learning. Then require all students to master these super-standards before starting either upper-level, college preparatory courses (AP/IB, intermediate algebra, chemistry, etc) or voc ed. course
Step 2:
When high school students reach the end of their sophomore year, present them with four choices:
(1) Continue on a college preparatory path leading to a four-year university or a four-year college transfer track at a community college. This choice would be contingent upon their having passed a standardized exit exam in English composition and literature, health and environmental science, elementary algebra and geometry, U.S. history and government and economics; or
(2) Enter a community college vocational program of their choice , with close supervision and support by their high school and continued access to the high school's extra-curricular activities. This would be contingent on their passing the same battery of exams the Choice 1 students take. Using existing and underutilized community college vocational programs means high schools would not have to reinvent the vocational wheel at their own sites, or:
(3) Receive intensive tutoring in high school, if unable so far to pass all or some of the exams, until they do so. They would have up to two year to climb over those barriers, and then an extra two years of free schooling to take AP and other prep classes on the college track if they so desire. This choice is just for those who want college prep their last two years of high school, including any who started the vocational track, choice 2, but changed their minds, or:
(4) Quit school and choose some other path.
Step 3:
Create a simple report card to evaluate the instructional effectiveness of individual high schools that everyone could understand. It would consist of five simple and largely unfudgeable - measures of the school's success: its pass rate on the two-year exit exams; its rate of graduate enrollment in four-year colleges (either right out of high school or as community college transfer); its AP/IB test-taking rate; its rate of students earning vocational certifications within four years of completing the exit exams; and its rate of graduates earning bachelor's degrees within six years of completing the college preparatory program.
The three steps would eliminate the high school diploma (an utterly meaningless document) and all standardized tests at the high school level except the eight subject-specific exit exams.
I think this is a discussion our school district should have... I don't agree with eliminating the high school diploma but I do think there is merit in much of Mr. Peter's plan. I also share some of the concerns of Mr. Mathews that there is a danger in sending students on one track or the other at the age of 16 (though many European countries do so at a much younger age and I don't believe it is the student's choice, the system decides).
So what do you think?
For those of you who don't want to read the article but want to participate in the discussion... basically the article was a discussion based on Chris Peters plan that would give both college-oriented and job-oriented students an equal chance. His 3 step plan is as follows:
Step 1:
Condense all universal high school requirements down to those which can be completed within two years and which consist of standards that are essential for the development of an informed citizenry and ensure that the student has the basic skills and knowledge base necessary for life-long learning. Then require all students to master these super-standards before starting either upper-level, college preparatory courses (AP/IB, intermediate algebra, chemistry, etc) or voc ed. course
Step 2:
When high school students reach the end of their sophomore year, present them with four choices:
(1) Continue on a college preparatory path leading to a four-year university or a four-year college transfer track at a community college. This choice would be contingent upon their having passed a standardized exit exam in English composition and literature, health and environmental science, elementary algebra and geometry, U.S. history and government and economics; or
(2) Enter a community college vocational program of their choice , with close supervision and support by their high school and continued access to the high school's extra-curricular activities. This would be contingent on their passing the same battery of exams the Choice 1 students take. Using existing and underutilized community college vocational programs means high schools would not have to reinvent the vocational wheel at their own sites, or:
(3) Receive intensive tutoring in high school, if unable so far to pass all or some of the exams, until they do so. They would have up to two year to climb over those barriers, and then an extra two years of free schooling to take AP and other prep classes on the college track if they so desire. This choice is just for those who want college prep their last two years of high school, including any who started the vocational track, choice 2, but changed their minds, or:
(4) Quit school and choose some other path.
Step 3:
Create a simple report card to evaluate the instructional effectiveness of individual high schools that everyone could understand. It would consist of five simple and largely unfudgeable - measures of the school's success: its pass rate on the two-year exit exams; its rate of graduate enrollment in four-year colleges (either right out of high school or as community college transfer); its AP/IB test-taking rate; its rate of students earning vocational certifications within four years of completing the exit exams; and its rate of graduates earning bachelor's degrees within six years of completing the college preparatory program.
The three steps would eliminate the high school diploma (an utterly meaningless document) and all standardized tests at the high school level except the eight subject-specific exit exams.
I think this is a discussion our school district should have... I don't agree with eliminating the high school diploma but I do think there is merit in much of Mr. Peter's plan. I also share some of the concerns of Mr. Mathews that there is a danger in sending students on one track or the other at the age of 16 (though many European countries do so at a much younger age and I don't believe it is the student's choice, the system decides).
So what do you think?
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Mr. Gotcha at it again but I think it backfired
At the school board meeting tonight, Mr. Becker pulled a number of executive session minutes stating that they were either incomplete, not accurate or violated the open meetings law. He further stated that the meetings were supposed to be started in open session with a reading of the statute that takes them to closed session. Mr. McDermott and Mrs. Bowen said that did in fact occur.
The fact is, if things happened as Mr. Becker explained he had a duty AT THE TIME to question why they were not starting in open session and reading the appropriate statutes, not participate in what HE is calling an illegal meeting and then waiting a few weeks to complain about it. If what he says is true he is JUST as "guilty" as the rest of the board for participating in what he knew was an illegal meeting.
This seems to me as Mr. Becker once again grandstanding, trying to cause problems and get a little attention. He wanted to play "gotcha" but he can't really do that successfully since he is right in the middle of it by staying for the meeting and saying nothing. His objection should have been made at the beginning of the meeting and he is the only one who stated that he knowingly attended such a meeting, since no one else recalled the meeting not being started in open session.
If his recollection is correct (and I doubt it since not a single board member agreed with him) he really shouldn't try and play gotcha -- he should state at the time there is a procedural problem and ask that the meeting be started in open session and the appropriate statue be read, not just go along with what he knows is wrong so he can try and play the hero later. He just ends up with egg on his face by acknowledging that he knowingly broke the law. Not good.
The fact is, if things happened as Mr. Becker explained he had a duty AT THE TIME to question why they were not starting in open session and reading the appropriate statutes, not participate in what HE is calling an illegal meeting and then waiting a few weeks to complain about it. If what he says is true he is JUST as "guilty" as the rest of the board for participating in what he knew was an illegal meeting.
This seems to me as Mr. Becker once again grandstanding, trying to cause problems and get a little attention. He wanted to play "gotcha" but he can't really do that successfully since he is right in the middle of it by staying for the meeting and saying nothing. His objection should have been made at the beginning of the meeting and he is the only one who stated that he knowingly attended such a meeting, since no one else recalled the meeting not being started in open session.
If his recollection is correct (and I doubt it since not a single board member agreed with him) he really shouldn't try and play gotcha -- he should state at the time there is a procedural problem and ask that the meeting be started in open session and the appropriate statue be read, not just go along with what he knows is wrong so he can try and play the hero later. He just ends up with egg on his face by acknowledging that he knowingly broke the law. Not good.
Monday, August 11, 2008
It is time the Silent Majority drown out the Vocal Minority
I've been thinking about what have unfolded the last week regarding the Oshkosh Superintendent situation read this posting on Eye on Oshkosh, it explains things perfectly.
I wanted to look at things from a different perspective, while the majority of the blame for people being "run out of town" goes to the naysayers those who disagree but say nothing are guilty as well. My father taught me that if you stand by and say nothing when someone tells a racist joke (for example) by your silence, you are in essence agreeing with what is said, or at least that is what others will assume.
I really think it is time for those in our community who do believe in our district, who can see the many positive things happening (even while wanting some things to change) need to speak out now and sing the praises of the district! I am by nature a pessimist (expect the worst and you won't be disappointed) and sometimes I focus on all the things that are wrong or need to change, however, I realize there are many positives in our district.
If we hope to attract a quality candidate for Supt. I believe the community needs to present a positive image of our district and the many things it has to offer. Those in the Silent Majority need to speak out and drown out those who spew so much negativity. In the last election for school board, clearly the voters chose to eliminate the negative, now it is time to accentuate the positive.
There will be plenty of time to work on needed changes. Right now I think we need to come together as people who care about the education of the children of the Oshkosh Area School District and support those who are working so hard to find a leader for our district. Yes I am talking about the 6 Board Members who have spent countless hours meeting to interview candidates, discuss the candidates qualifications and select someone they believed, in good faith, would be best to lead our district. There are plenty of things I disagree with a number of members about, but from all I have read, those 6 have been dedicated to finding the best Supt. for Oshkosh. It must be incredibly frustrating to have one of your own colleagues undermine what you have worked so hard on. How Mr. Becker could possibly have the respect of his colleagues is beyond me. His grandstanding and ego stroking is NOT what we need in this district. I can only hope the voters agree.
I really don't want people to spend too much time focusing on the negativity the radiates from Mr. Becker, rather I want people to focus on the positives of Oshkosh and the Oshkosh Area School District. I would like posters to focus on why someone would want to be Oshkosh's next Superintendent... What are the district's assets, strengths, uniqueness? I will delete those posts I deem negative.
I wanted to look at things from a different perspective, while the majority of the blame for people being "run out of town" goes to the naysayers those who disagree but say nothing are guilty as well. My father taught me that if you stand by and say nothing when someone tells a racist joke (for example) by your silence, you are in essence agreeing with what is said, or at least that is what others will assume.
I really think it is time for those in our community who do believe in our district, who can see the many positive things happening (even while wanting some things to change) need to speak out now and sing the praises of the district! I am by nature a pessimist (expect the worst and you won't be disappointed) and sometimes I focus on all the things that are wrong or need to change, however, I realize there are many positives in our district.
If we hope to attract a quality candidate for Supt. I believe the community needs to present a positive image of our district and the many things it has to offer. Those in the Silent Majority need to speak out and drown out those who spew so much negativity. In the last election for school board, clearly the voters chose to eliminate the negative, now it is time to accentuate the positive.
There will be plenty of time to work on needed changes. Right now I think we need to come together as people who care about the education of the children of the Oshkosh Area School District and support those who are working so hard to find a leader for our district. Yes I am talking about the 6 Board Members who have spent countless hours meeting to interview candidates, discuss the candidates qualifications and select someone they believed, in good faith, would be best to lead our district. There are plenty of things I disagree with a number of members about, but from all I have read, those 6 have been dedicated to finding the best Supt. for Oshkosh. It must be incredibly frustrating to have one of your own colleagues undermine what you have worked so hard on. How Mr. Becker could possibly have the respect of his colleagues is beyond me. His grandstanding and ego stroking is NOT what we need in this district. I can only hope the voters agree.
I really don't want people to spend too much time focusing on the negativity the radiates from Mr. Becker, rather I want people to focus on the positives of Oshkosh and the Oshkosh Area School District. I would like posters to focus on why someone would want to be Oshkosh's next Superintendent... What are the district's assets, strengths, uniqueness? I will delete those posts I deem negative.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Disturbing Quote --- Does it Imply a Violation of the Open Meetings Law?
Dan Becker was quoted in an article in the Waukesha Freeman on June 11th stating:
{Becker said that he and other board members “thought we had Todd Gray all squared away” to replace their outgoing Superintendent Ron Heilmann, ...}
What does that mean? Could that be a violation of the open meetings laws? Who are these other board members?
If Dan Becker didn't discuss making Todd Gray the new superintendent why is he quoted as saying they thought they had it all squared away? Wouldn't it take 3 other board member to "square it away"? I find such comments very troubling, they certainly give the impression board business was being discussed among Mr. Becker and other board members outside of the publicly noticed meetings.
{Becker said that he and other board members “thought we had Todd Gray all squared away” to replace their outgoing Superintendent Ron Heilmann, ...}
What does that mean? Could that be a violation of the open meetings laws? Who are these other board members?
If Dan Becker didn't discuss making Todd Gray the new superintendent why is he quoted as saying they thought they had it all squared away? Wouldn't it take 3 other board member to "square it away"? I find such comments very troubling, they certainly give the impression board business was being discussed among Mr. Becker and other board members outside of the publicly noticed meetings.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
OASD Future
Well, it is official (or almost) according to the Northwestern Todd Gray has accepted the position as superintendent of the Waukesha school district.
While the timing is unfortunate (having to look for a business director before the search for a superintendent has even begun) I wish Mr. Gray well and I do not think the board has made a mistake in deciding to search for a superintendent rather than just pick someone "in house" who happens to have a superintendents license.
I have been following the OASD School Board for nearly 11 years and I have never felt as hopeful about the district's future as I do now. The new board really seems to get along well, they have fun, they disagree without being disagreeable and they really seem to want to focus on moving the district forward rather than engage in petty bickering.
As for the search for a superintendent, it was clear to me at the last board meeting that 6 of the 7 board members are prepared to find and hire the best candidate they can find, whether that person is already working in the district, or is employed by another district, even one outside the state of Wisconsin. I think that is a wise approach.
I think organizations should always strive for the best qualified candidate for any position but especially the top position in the organization. How can you know if an internal candidate is the best candidate if you don't even consider any others? Some say not automatically hiring someone from within the district with the requisite license is a mistake that will make it hard to find a superintendent... that makes little sense to me since obviously all external candidates would hope the district would not "hire from within". This district has "promoted from within" a number of times in the recent past, but always after an interview process... think Lincoln School, Oaklawn School, Webster Stanley Elementary School... each of those principals was a teacher in our district before becoming the principal. To say we don't promote from within simply is not based in fact.
I am willing to wait and see where this hiring process leads us. I think the board should seize the opportunity that has presented itself and find a new superintendent to lead the district forward.
How much or how little do you feel the public should be involved in this decision? Hiring a superintendent (as well as evaluating the superintendent) is the primary job of a school board. It seems few, if any, members of the public are interested in this process. Personally, I think a model similar to that the Common Council used would serve the district well. A chance to observe candidates interacting with the public, is vital. The rest is up to the board.
While the timing is unfortunate (having to look for a business director before the search for a superintendent has even begun) I wish Mr. Gray well and I do not think the board has made a mistake in deciding to search for a superintendent rather than just pick someone "in house" who happens to have a superintendents license.
I have been following the OASD School Board for nearly 11 years and I have never felt as hopeful about the district's future as I do now. The new board really seems to get along well, they have fun, they disagree without being disagreeable and they really seem to want to focus on moving the district forward rather than engage in petty bickering.
As for the search for a superintendent, it was clear to me at the last board meeting that 6 of the 7 board members are prepared to find and hire the best candidate they can find, whether that person is already working in the district, or is employed by another district, even one outside the state of Wisconsin. I think that is a wise approach.
I think organizations should always strive for the best qualified candidate for any position but especially the top position in the organization. How can you know if an internal candidate is the best candidate if you don't even consider any others? Some say not automatically hiring someone from within the district with the requisite license is a mistake that will make it hard to find a superintendent... that makes little sense to me since obviously all external candidates would hope the district would not "hire from within". This district has "promoted from within" a number of times in the recent past, but always after an interview process... think Lincoln School, Oaklawn School, Webster Stanley Elementary School... each of those principals was a teacher in our district before becoming the principal. To say we don't promote from within simply is not based in fact.
I am willing to wait and see where this hiring process leads us. I think the board should seize the opportunity that has presented itself and find a new superintendent to lead the district forward.
How much or how little do you feel the public should be involved in this decision? Hiring a superintendent (as well as evaluating the superintendent) is the primary job of a school board. It seems few, if any, members of the public are interested in this process. Personally, I think a model similar to that the Common Council used would serve the district well. A chance to observe candidates interacting with the public, is vital. The rest is up to the board.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Could Oshkosh be Losing Another Administrator?
As I was surfing the net I came across this story from the Journal Sentinel. The basics:
Waukesha - The School Board has narrowed its search for a new superintendent to two finalists - the superintendent of the Cudahy School District and the deputy superintendent of the Oshkosh School District - and could announce a decision later this week.
I wonder what this will mean for the district. Will it make things that much harder to find a superintendent if the district is also looking for a business director? It hasn't been all that easy to keep a business director in this district. I guess we will see sooner rather than later.
Waukesha - The School Board has narrowed its search for a new superintendent to two finalists - the superintendent of the Cudahy School District and the deputy superintendent of the Oshkosh School District - and could announce a decision later this week.
I wonder what this will mean for the district. Will it make things that much harder to find a superintendent if the district is also looking for a business director? It hasn't been all that easy to keep a business director in this district. I guess we will see sooner rather than later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
<