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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

STATE FUNDING FOR SCHOOLS... What about that 2/3 funding?

Most people, even school people get confused by the 2/3 state funding and think that means the State of Wisconsin funds 2/3 of the budget for every school in the state. That is incorrect. The 2/3 funding is an average for the entire state. I found the following on the Madison School District site and while it pertains specifically to Madison, much of the explanation applies to Oshkosh as well (I will insert Oshkosh data when it differs from Madison)

From the Madison School District Web Site:

"The major issue facing schools currently is the revenue cap that limits the amount of money that a Wisconsin school district can spend -- based on a formula that does not take into account the actual increased costs that occur each year.

The state does currently fund 2/3 of the cost of education across the state. This is an average figure and varies dramatically from district to district. In the case of Madison, the state funds approximately 28% of our costs.[For Oshkosh it is nearly 2/3 I think about 62%] The revenue cap is a property tax measure, not an education measure. The more the state funds K-12 education, the less that property tax payers in a district have to pay.

The service reductions that district's across the state are having to make every year is the result of our inability to fund the same level of service each year. This happens because the amount of money we can use per pupil is not allowed to increase as rapidly as the cost of providing the service increases.

In the case of Madison, the state mandates that our budget can increase by only 2.6% a year,[that figure is about the same for Oshkosh] but our costs to continue providing the same services to our children increase at least 3.8% per year. This is the minimum increase that occurs because of the current state law that allows school districts to avoid arbitration with their teachers union if they offer that 3.8% increase in total salary and benefits. Obviously, that means that unions are never going to settle below 3.8%.

Salary and benefits are 86% of our budget,[about the same for Oshkosh] so the 3.8% creates a floor to our expenses. Our other expenses such as insurance and utilities rise much more than the 3.8% each year. In these areas, we are subject to the same market forces that homeowners and businesses are.

The gap that results from the difference between the 2.6% we can expend and the 3.8% minimum increase in costs (it is usually 4.0 - 4.2%) [again that is the same for Oshkosh] is the reason we and almost every other school district in Wisconsin has to reduce services to their students every year.

To put this in context, if we were doing everything today that we were doing in 1993 -- when the revenue cap law went into effect -- we would have 526 more employees and our budget would be $46 million higher that it is today. [I don't know those figures for Oshkosh but it would certainly be more significantly more than it is today]. I think this number quantifies the difference that the revenue cap has made in services to children."

I find the above to be a very understandable explanation for how 2/3 funding works, and why districts can't "live within their means" as some like to criticize. Contrary to what many taxpayers believe, school districts cannot just increase taxes to provide services, most are limited to a 2.6% increase in their budget and as the above explains, costs increase at a greater amount than revenue is allowed to increase, hence budget cuts are required, pretty much every year. Revenue controls have been good for property taxpayers but not good for school districts. The Revenue Controls have hit Oshkosh Schools especially hard because it has always been a frugal district and the Controls locked school districts in at what they were spending in 1993 and only allowed approximately 2.6% increases each year. It doesn't take an accountant to understand why so many school districts are struggling.

It is too bad more taxpayers don't understand this whole issue. It is not poor management on the part of school districts, it is an unfair funding formula (primarily favoring school districts in the Milwaukee suburbs).

SUPERINTENDENT SEARCH

I think most people would agree the major task facing the school board over the next few months is to hire a new superintendent. A search firm will be hired to assist the board in this process. I imagine at some point the opinions of the community will be sought, I hope more people show up than showed up for a similar meeting regarding the City Manager. Sometimes it seems as if very few want to get involved but many like to complain. Then again sometimes I let the blogs skew my perceptions. If you really stop and count the number of posters on a blog that requires registration (Oshkonversation) you will note that for the most part there are 5-10 different posters on any given thread. Hardly the voice of the community.

At any rate, I'd like to know what readers think should be considered when hiring a new superintendent for the Oshkosh Area School District? Is previous experience as a superintendent necessary? Should board members visit the community where the final candidates work? What qualities are necessary in a new superintendent, what qualities would be nice to have and what qualities are not really important at all?

It appears that all the districts around us that are looking for, or have hired, a new superintendent have paid that person more than our current superintendent makes (anywhere from $20,000 to $40,000 more), should this matter? Will we have to pay in that range to stay competitive or do we just set a dollar figure and see who is willing to come to Oshkosh for that amount?

How would you go about "including" the community or is this strictly a Board decision?

I guess that is enough to get people started...