For those of my 6 readers that look for me on the Journal Times blogs, I am giving it up. After rereading the comments on the Hicks contract extension posting, I have decided that most of the bloggers on that site are much to willing to stoop to personal attacks and refuse to debate an issue reasonably. I do not wish to trade barbs with people of that ilk; I want to debate the issues honestly and fairly. I also realize I am definitely not alone; Denis Navatril, Eric Marcus and Fred (especially in the last couple days) have all been victims of similar abuse. Actually, I should feel somewhat honored to be is such esteemed company.
I am thinking of giving up this blog too, since I am not sure if it has done any good except providing me with some much needed (and free) therapy. Or maybe I’ll just focus on the “hard-hitting” issues in Racine, such as what is the best park or how to create an Easter wreath with the leftover egg cartons (this is possible, by the way, my 9 year old and I have done it).
I know this though; the citizens of Racine (and I am including some board members) are completely apathetic to what is going on in our schools. As you may be aware, I am a mother of 2 but this IS not about them or how RUSD has ruined them. My children do very well (with no thanks to RUSD) because they are extremely intelligent; I would dare say they would do well even in a worse environment. But many children are not blessed with their natural abilities, and are struggling.
My passion is for them and for the community I call home. How much longer will I have to continue watching our schools suffer academically and from the continual mismanagement of educational dollars? Doesn’t anybody realize how schools affect a community? When will the rest of the public wake up?
I’m still not sure if I will continue this blogging thing; just in case this is my last post I want to say to everyone in Racine – “Good Night, and Good Luck”.
Friday, June 30, 2006
Mr. Racine's Report Card Speaks
(Note: Brenda is aware that I am writing this, but does not know the content. She will be reading it here for the first time.)
Now you guys have gone and done it. Brenda is threatening to pack it in. I’m sure there is a collective sigh of relief from a group of you out there who think she is some crackpot with wild ideas. I would just like you to know that Brenda has devoted a lot of time (with my blessing) to learning as much as she can about our district. Consequently, she has a more thorough knowledge of things going on in this district than, arguably, all of you, and probably most of the board members too.
She is one of the most intelligent people I have ever met, and does not put out her opinions without much fact finding and thought. Her opinions are also not set in stone. If someone can INTELLIGENTLY argue with her, and back it up with some actual facts, she is not above rethinking an issue. Although I don’t believe anyone has done it yet. When ignorant people attack her personally, instead of her ideas (as has happened a lot recently on the JT blogs), she gets hurt. She is not an animal. She is… a human being. She realizes that those people need to just be ignored, but that is sometimes easier said than done.
She has been at this for going on about 5 years now. It started when our then 1st grader’s teacher was telling us about the new CP program at a parent/teacher conference. The teacher, by the way, thought it was stupid. Brenda did a few Google searches, and found out what a horrible failure Dr. Hicks’ new QDM had been in other school districts. She did also find examples of where it worked, but not in a district so big and diverse. It should be noted also that the district that Dr. Hicks came from, abandoned this program after he left, I believe.
It was then that Brenda started attending board meetings, and talking to board members. One of them told her that she should go to the library and look at the vouchers, which she did. It has just snowballed from there. Its funny how the more you look, the more you find.
Although the blogging is new, her interest in the schools is not. For the guy who said that she needed therapy, blogging IS her therapy. Without it, she would probably explode. It is funny seeing the speculation out there on why she does what she does. Is it so hard to believe that she is just a concerned parent? All parents should be so concerned.
I guess I should wrap this up. So, Brenda is very discouraged about the general public’s apathy toward our schools, the Superintendent’s apparent (to her) corruption, the gutless (my word, not hers) board that lets him get away with it, and the abuse she is taking for trying to make a difference. She is threatening to say, “F*** it! Nobody else cares, why should I?” I personally don’t think she can do it, but you never know. I would hate to see her stop, it would be a tremendous waste.
I apologize for the length (never thought I would say that), but I thought you, her readers, should know a little background. Maybe I can convince her to give you a more thorough history in the future.
Thanks for your time.
Now you guys have gone and done it. Brenda is threatening to pack it in. I’m sure there is a collective sigh of relief from a group of you out there who think she is some crackpot with wild ideas. I would just like you to know that Brenda has devoted a lot of time (with my blessing) to learning as much as she can about our district. Consequently, she has a more thorough knowledge of things going on in this district than, arguably, all of you, and probably most of the board members too.
She is one of the most intelligent people I have ever met, and does not put out her opinions without much fact finding and thought. Her opinions are also not set in stone. If someone can INTELLIGENTLY argue with her, and back it up with some actual facts, she is not above rethinking an issue. Although I don’t believe anyone has done it yet. When ignorant people attack her personally, instead of her ideas (as has happened a lot recently on the JT blogs), she gets hurt. She is not an animal. She is… a human being. She realizes that those people need to just be ignored, but that is sometimes easier said than done.
She has been at this for going on about 5 years now. It started when our then 1st grader’s teacher was telling us about the new CP program at a parent/teacher conference. The teacher, by the way, thought it was stupid. Brenda did a few Google searches, and found out what a horrible failure Dr. Hicks’ new QDM had been in other school districts. She did also find examples of where it worked, but not in a district so big and diverse. It should be noted also that the district that Dr. Hicks came from, abandoned this program after he left, I believe.
It was then that Brenda started attending board meetings, and talking to board members. One of them told her that she should go to the library and look at the vouchers, which she did. It has just snowballed from there. Its funny how the more you look, the more you find.
Although the blogging is new, her interest in the schools is not. For the guy who said that she needed therapy, blogging IS her therapy. Without it, she would probably explode. It is funny seeing the speculation out there on why she does what she does. Is it so hard to believe that she is just a concerned parent? All parents should be so concerned.
I guess I should wrap this up. So, Brenda is very discouraged about the general public’s apathy toward our schools, the Superintendent’s apparent (to her) corruption, the gutless (my word, not hers) board that lets him get away with it, and the abuse she is taking for trying to make a difference. She is threatening to say, “F*** it! Nobody else cares, why should I?” I personally don’t think she can do it, but you never know. I would hate to see her stop, it would be a tremendous waste.
I apologize for the length (never thought I would say that), but I thought you, her readers, should know a little background. Maybe I can convince her to give you a more thorough history in the future.
Thanks for your time.
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Is $304,000 RUSD Consultant Bonus Justfied?
RealDebate over at RDW has an interesting piece on the $304,000 bonus paid to the consultant group acting as the RUSD financial team. Sadly, this will probably go unnoticed in the mainstream media and if it does actually get some press time, the focus won’t be on the issues but on who brought this to the public’s attention.
As some would say, “we get what we deserve”. Again, tell me why questioning the corruption of local governments is obsessive?
As some would say, “we get what we deserve”. Again, tell me why questioning the corruption of local governments is obsessive?
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
I have arrived...
I have arrived! Finally, my first cyber stalkers! Based on the comments on a recent Journal Times blog , it has come to the public’s attention that I:
1. Am a bad mother.
2. Suffer from Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
3. Have a cut and paste website (???)
4. Must be a fired RUSD teacher.
5. Bitter.
6. Full of hate.
Since this has all been uncovered, I feel I must admit there is more. I also:
1. Torture small animals.
2. Hate America.
3. Listen to Yanni.
4. Steal candy from babies.
Whew, I feel better now… Confession really is good for the soul.
Monday, June 26, 2006
Continuous Progress Teaching Strategy Addressed - Finally!
Finally, some press time for my favorite RUSD topic – Continuous Progress .Once upon a time, I was a clueless (but satisfied!!!) parent of a child enrolled in RUSD. Then one day at a teacher conference, my child’s 1st grade teacher told me about the new teaching strategy, Continuous Progress (CP), where children are separated by ability level. While I sat there absorbing the information, I thought to myself “How is this any different than the strategy being used now?” You see, my child’s school was already separating the children by ability level so I assumed there would not be any difference. I DID NOT realize that this practice had been abandoned at most of the RUSD elementary schools. As a child, my elementary school (Olympia Brown) did the same; I still want to know when this common practice of teaching to the lowest common denominator became the fashion.
However, as this teacher became to explain the intricacies of CP, I began to get more and more concerned. The new strategy would break my son’s reading class into 2 small groups (10 – 15 kids). One group would be advanced readers, and the other group would be remedial or somewhere in between. The teacher would teach one group and the other group would work “independently”; after 15 minutes or so, the groups would switch. This process repeats itself for 90 to 120 minutes daily. It is what I like to call “short attention span education”. I still do not see how a 6 or 7 year-old child can study independently for any length of time. The children not being taught are not allowed to ask questions while the other group is being instructed. How many teachable moments are being lost on a daily basis if a child cannot ask a question?
There are many reasons I do not like CP, but separating them by level is not one of them. With that said, I think if the groups were formed into 3 larger groups (advanced, proficient and remedial) the process would be implemented more efficiently; with all these multiple groups in the same room, classroom time is utterly chaotic. There are too many needs and not enough resources to go around.
Continous Progress involves Mastery Learning. This is another one of those concepts that sound great in theory, but in reality it can be damaging when done wrong. Using the current strategy, a child cannot advance to the next level until he/she has mastered the material. However, VERY LITTLE OR NOTHING is being done for the child who is far behind. Right now we have 4th graders reading at a 1st grade level and getting A’s on their report card because he reads very well at the 1st grade level. There are few programs left, such as Title I, that address these problems; those programs were severely reduced when CP was introduced because it was believed there would not be necessary.
Now reading recovery programs have had to be EXPANDED at the middle school level to meet the needs of the children who did not quite “get it” in elementary school. Is this really what we want for our children and our community? RUSD is not fiscally or educationally sound; tell me again why keeping RUSD would be a good thing….
However, as this teacher became to explain the intricacies of CP, I began to get more and more concerned. The new strategy would break my son’s reading class into 2 small groups (10 – 15 kids). One group would be advanced readers, and the other group would be remedial or somewhere in between. The teacher would teach one group and the other group would work “independently”; after 15 minutes or so, the groups would switch. This process repeats itself for 90 to 120 minutes daily. It is what I like to call “short attention span education”. I still do not see how a 6 or 7 year-old child can study independently for any length of time. The children not being taught are not allowed to ask questions while the other group is being instructed. How many teachable moments are being lost on a daily basis if a child cannot ask a question?
There are many reasons I do not like CP, but separating them by level is not one of them. With that said, I think if the groups were formed into 3 larger groups (advanced, proficient and remedial) the process would be implemented more efficiently; with all these multiple groups in the same room, classroom time is utterly chaotic. There are too many needs and not enough resources to go around.
Continous Progress involves Mastery Learning. This is another one of those concepts that sound great in theory, but in reality it can be damaging when done wrong. Using the current strategy, a child cannot advance to the next level until he/she has mastered the material. However, VERY LITTLE OR NOTHING is being done for the child who is far behind. Right now we have 4th graders reading at a 1st grade level and getting A’s on their report card because he reads very well at the 1st grade level. There are few programs left, such as Title I, that address these problems; those programs were severely reduced when CP was introduced because it was believed there would not be necessary.
Now reading recovery programs have had to be EXPANDED at the middle school level to meet the needs of the children who did not quite “get it” in elementary school. Is this really what we want for our children and our community? RUSD is not fiscally or educationally sound; tell me again why keeping RUSD would be a good thing….
Thursday, June 22, 2006
Can Caledonia's Tax Base Support Its Own Schools?
Can the tax base in Caledonia support its own school district? That is the question for many as the debate over Caledonia seceding from RUSD continues. Without knowing what kind of start-up costs Caledonia would be responsible for, it is difficult to project. It’s not as if information like this is available on the DPI website. However, I think we could start by looking at Caledonia’s current school taxes and seeing what sort of projected revenue a new district could expect to receive.
In the last tax year (2005), Caledonia paid RUSD $13,180,483.70 which was collected via property taxes. As you are probably aware, local property tax revenue is 1/3 of the school funding formula and state aid covers the other 2/3. This formula is adjusted for many different variables (poverty, special education, busing, etc) but is a good starting point. I will be using this formula because I think that Caledonia is an “average” community; we do not have the poverty of the urban areas nor do we have the large property tax base of communities like Whitefish Bay or Mequon.
$13,180,483.70 = Local Property Taxes (1/3)
$26,360,967.40 = State Education Taxes (2/3)
$39,541,451.10 = Total Revenue
3200 = Total Number of students
$39,541,451.10 / 3200 = $12, 356.70
Total revenue per student = $12,356.70
It is interesting to me that the revenue per student is almost identical to RUSD’s current revenue per student. I realize that there will be “double-secret” start up costs that will be discovered in the Village’s fact finding mission. I hope the first fact they verify is the “building” factor. It is my understanding (by speaking with people who attempted this a few years ago) that since all Unified’s buildings are paid for and Caledonia is no longer a township (which did not have the same legal rights as a village or city) that the buildings that currently lie within the village’s borders will come with secession.
However, I still think that it’s reassuring that with our current tax base, we most likely pay enough to support a future district by my (admittedly rough) estimation.
In the last tax year (2005), Caledonia paid RUSD $13,180,483.70 which was collected via property taxes. As you are probably aware, local property tax revenue is 1/3 of the school funding formula and state aid covers the other 2/3. This formula is adjusted for many different variables (poverty, special education, busing, etc) but is a good starting point. I will be using this formula because I think that Caledonia is an “average” community; we do not have the poverty of the urban areas nor do we have the large property tax base of communities like Whitefish Bay or Mequon.
$13,180,483.70 = Local Property Taxes (1/3)
$26,360,967.40 = State Education Taxes (2/3)
$39,541,451.10 = Total Revenue
3200 = Total Number of students
$39,541,451.10 / 3200 = $12, 356.70
Total revenue per student = $12,356.70
It is interesting to me that the revenue per student is almost identical to RUSD’s current revenue per student. I realize that there will be “double-secret” start up costs that will be discovered in the Village’s fact finding mission. I hope the first fact they verify is the “building” factor. It is my understanding (by speaking with people who attempted this a few years ago) that since all Unified’s buildings are paid for and Caledonia is no longer a township (which did not have the same legal rights as a village or city) that the buildings that currently lie within the village’s borders will come with secession.
However, I still think that it’s reassuring that with our current tax base, we most likely pay enough to support a future district by my (admittedly rough) estimation.
Monday, June 19, 2006
Suburban Racine Schools
Citizens currently residing within the Racine Unified School District (RUSD) and outside the City of Racine are asked to voice their opinion on the following topic.
Should the suburban communities of eastern Racine County break away from RUSD and form a new school district?
With the recent financial concerns and questionable choices made by the RUSD school board and CEO, Dr. Thomas Hicks, it is apparent that Unified is not meeting the educational needs of all children and families of eastern Racine County. The news of recent months has put the entire community in a bad light and shows no sign of improvement.
A group of citizens is looking for support to establishing a suburban school district in eastern Racine County. If you support this notion send an email to suburbanracineschools@gmail.com We would like to show the amount of support to village boards and try to establish an advisory referendum on the November ballot.
For more information go to www.suburbanracineschools.info
Should the suburban communities of eastern Racine County break away from RUSD and form a new school district?
With the recent financial concerns and questionable choices made by the RUSD school board and CEO, Dr. Thomas Hicks, it is apparent that Unified is not meeting the educational needs of all children and families of eastern Racine County. The news of recent months has put the entire community in a bad light and shows no sign of improvement.
A group of citizens is looking for support to establishing a suburban school district in eastern Racine County. If you support this notion send an email to suburbanracineschools@gmail.com We would like to show the amount of support to village boards and try to establish an advisory referendum on the November ballot.
For more information go to www.suburbanracineschools.info
Sunday, June 18, 2006
Is It Time For A Change?
I read with much interest the article in the Journal Times regarding the Village of Caledonia’s possible secession from RUSD. This is an initiative I am clearly in support of but I urge every man, woman and child in the outlying areas to make this happen. We cannot simply do nothing and expect the outcome we desire. The first step is to make sure your wishes are known; nothing will be done if the leadership of our villages think that this is a “boutique” issue that only a few care about. Call, write or email the trustees of your village and make sure they understand seceding from Unified will benefit both the City of Racine and its outlying neighbors!
I am including contact information for Caledonia and Mt. Pleasant. Please consider contacting them right away. If you live in a different area, I urge to call your village hall and let them know your concerns.
Once the village knows that there is initial support, then and only then, can the plan go any further. We don’t need to know all of the logistics right now; we only need to gauge public interest!!
There are currently plans underway to have a website devoted to this issue; it is currently under construction. Please check back soon for more information…
I am including contact information for Caledonia and Mt. Pleasant. Please consider contacting them right away. If you live in a different area, I urge to call your village hall and let them know your concerns.
Once the village knows that there is initial support, then and only then, can the plan go any further. We don’t need to know all of the logistics right now; we only need to gauge public interest!!
There are currently plans underway to have a website devoted to this issue; it is currently under construction. Please check back soon for more information…
Saturday, June 17, 2006
The RUSD-GTC Connection
It would seem that RUSD is not alone in being accused of not acting in a transparent way and abusing educational tax dollars. Our the local paper reported that Gateway Technological College (GTC) has abused its taxing authority by building its 2 technology centers – CATI in Sturtevant and BioCATT in Kenosha. Under normal circumstances, Gateway, like RUSD, would have to go to referendum for any new buildings. However, if the building is for an applied technology center (ATC) and 30% of the cost is covered by private donations, a technical college does not have to seek the approval of taxpayers to do so. Through an audit done by the Legisalative Audit Bureau it was discovered (after the fact) that this did not happen.
As I was reading the article this morning, a few key comments made by local legislators phrases popped out at me:
From State Representative John Lehman (D-Racine):
- “… the inflated projection of 2000 students per year far exceeds the 99 students reported in March of 2006. The centers are costly to the taxpayers and are underutilized. "
And the most telling comments from State Senator Jody Robson (D-Beloit):
- “If these two centers had not been cloaked in so much secrecy, we may not have had to ask for an expensive, time-consuming audit by the Legislative Audit Bureau.”
- “I hope that this audit will inspire the two centers to increase their accountability and transparency.”
What do both RUSD and GTC have in common; the answer is their governance process – The Policy Governance® Model. While this model works for many non-profit boards, I believe it is not the best governing style for boards that control the spending of tax dollars. Because the boards, under this governing style, are encouraged to speak with one voice, it is difficult for any one to publicly view a dissenting voice. Without any public questioning, most of the decisions are made without the public's knowledge.
Ironically, this process was introduced to RUSD by Gateway. In their initial presentation to the RUSD board last year, Gateway extolled the virtues of conducting business using this model. It would eliminate micro-managing, they said, and leave most of the decision-making to the educational professionals. The board would only oversee the decisions; they would not learn many of the details, only the predicted “outcome” of the monies authorized by the boards.
Isn’t it time we requested more accountability of our tax dollars? And on that note, can we demand (again!!) an audit of RUSD by the Legislative Audit Bureau?
Friday, June 16, 2006
Addional Revenue Will Do Nothing for Suburban Schools
Recently, the financial consultants contracted by RUSD found a way, through some rather controversial accounting changes, to levy additional taxes. In today’s Journal Times, there is a story where this “revenue enhancement” may be used to fund the district’s Lighted Schoolhouse program.
The Lighted Schoolhouse program currently serves 685 students at schools in the city limits; the additional revenue may be used to expand the program to yet another school within the city limits. I am not questioning the need for the Lighted Schoolhouse program, an after school program which has grown from a “free daycare” program to a program that actually aligns itself with the curriculum taught and reinforces the concepts taught during the regular classroom day.
What I am questioning is that this additional revenue is going to fund a program that currently only serves .03% of the student population. Let’s try to look at this another way, if additional revenue was going to be used to serve the gifted student population OR to fund programs only served by the suburban schools, don’t you think that there would be a public outcry?
As with the Paullin Group plan, the needs of the suburban areas and families with gifted children have been ignored. Clearly, the only thing that the residents of Mt. Pleasant and Caledonia are good for is their money. The suburban residents are being underserved by RUSD; perhaps it is time to break away from the district. It is apparent that RUSD has too many diverse needs, and not enough resources to go around.
The Lighted Schoolhouse program currently serves 685 students at schools in the city limits; the additional revenue may be used to expand the program to yet another school within the city limits. I am not questioning the need for the Lighted Schoolhouse program, an after school program which has grown from a “free daycare” program to a program that actually aligns itself with the curriculum taught and reinforces the concepts taught during the regular classroom day.
What I am questioning is that this additional revenue is going to fund a program that currently only serves .03% of the student population. Let’s try to look at this another way, if additional revenue was going to be used to serve the gifted student population OR to fund programs only served by the suburban schools, don’t you think that there would be a public outcry?
As with the Paullin Group plan, the needs of the suburban areas and families with gifted children have been ignored. Clearly, the only thing that the residents of Mt. Pleasant and Caledonia are good for is their money. The suburban residents are being underserved by RUSD; perhaps it is time to break away from the district. It is apparent that RUSD has too many diverse needs, and not enough resources to go around.
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Can school vouchers save Racine?
Are school vouchers the answer to the problems we face in Racine? That was the question I had before I attended an informational meeting concerning this issue tonight at Gateway Technical College. The meeting was hosted by the parent association of St. Catherine's HS and State Representative Robin Vos was the guest speaker. While there was no definite outcome of this meeting, I am now convinced that school vouchers are a viable solution to solving the educational crisis the Racine area faces.
Robin Vos’ comments about the public perception about school choice really hit home with me. He asked us to ponder this question to our friends and neighbors - “Should parents have a choice on where their child should go to school?” The answer, I believe, should be YES. School vouchers are not about partisan politics, or promoting religion. School vouchers are simply another tool to help improve education in Racine. Supporting this initiative can really help the kids that need it the most; this is something that RUSD has failed at repeatedly.
Vouchers schools may even help the public schools; besides providing healthy competition to RUSD, it may help make the remaining student population easier to manage. It would be very difficult to argue that smaller schools and smaller class sizes would be a bad thing for RUSD.
Even I am not naïve enough to believe that the road to bring school vouchers to Racine will not be bumpy and full of detours, but I think we need to start our journey to a better educational system for Racine now. The educational crisis we are facing is not going away anytime soon.
Robin Vos’ comments about the public perception about school choice really hit home with me. He asked us to ponder this question to our friends and neighbors - “Should parents have a choice on where their child should go to school?” The answer, I believe, should be YES. School vouchers are not about partisan politics, or promoting religion. School vouchers are simply another tool to help improve education in Racine. Supporting this initiative can really help the kids that need it the most; this is something that RUSD has failed at repeatedly.
Vouchers schools may even help the public schools; besides providing healthy competition to RUSD, it may help make the remaining student population easier to manage. It would be very difficult to argue that smaller schools and smaller class sizes would be a bad thing for RUSD.
Even I am not naïve enough to believe that the road to bring school vouchers to Racine will not be bumpy and full of detours, but I think we need to start our journey to a better educational system for Racine now. The educational crisis we are facing is not going away anytime soon.
The Death of a Liberal
My left-learning, union-card carrying father will not be happy. It’s probably a good thing he doesn’t read this blog, or I am sure that I would be disowned. I am planning to attend an informational meeting later this evening on school vouchers. Being raised by a liberal, it would only make sense that I carry some of those inklings of liberalism into my adult life. I have to be honest, up until a few months ago, I was fundamentally against vouchers for different reasons.
One of the major reasons is the whole “separation of church and state” thing; I have overcome the obstacle (I think) and am working my way through the next my next major barrier – equity and access. As much as I agree that the voucher system in Milwaukee creates healthy competition for the MPS schools, I do not think it is fair to only offer it to 20% of MPS student population. On the other hand, offering a viable alternative for 20% of the families is still better than offering it to none.
I am not convinced that voucher schools are the answer, but I am open-minded enough to hear the information so I can make an informed decision. We need to solve the educational crisis here in Racine, and everybody should explore all the alternatives. The residents of Greater Racine need to stop the constant bickering and begin to solve the real problems we all face.
One of the major reasons is the whole “separation of church and state” thing; I have overcome the obstacle (I think) and am working my way through the next my next major barrier – equity and access. As much as I agree that the voucher system in Milwaukee creates healthy competition for the MPS schools, I do not think it is fair to only offer it to 20% of MPS student population. On the other hand, offering a viable alternative for 20% of the families is still better than offering it to none.
I am not convinced that voucher schools are the answer, but I am open-minded enough to hear the information so I can make an informed decision. We need to solve the educational crisis here in Racine, and everybody should explore all the alternatives. The residents of Greater Racine need to stop the constant bickering and begin to solve the real problems we all face.
Monday, June 12, 2006
The Paullin Plan
After nearly two years, Dr. Paullin, of The Paullin Group, presented the executive summary of the long-range Master Facilities Plan to the Racine Unified School Board. I’m sure that there will be many forthcoming discussions on this, but I thought I would summarize the plan as much as I can. There were not any handouts at the meeting, nor did they use the overhead projector so most of the amounts will be rounded up and I am sure I missed some details, so please be patient with me…
First off, the board had instructed Dr. Paullin to do the facility study with the following grade configurations: K-6, 7-9, and 10-12. As you all should be aware, RUSD is planning to offer 4-year old kindergarten in the fall so the plan had to be changed midway through the process (This is one of the many reasons that report is 6 months overdue!) However, the board received the results of the $1.2MM study with the following grade configurations:
Early Childhood (3,4, and 5 year olds)
Grades 1-3 (Lower Elementary)
Grades 4-6 (Upper Elementary)
Grades 7-9
Grades 10-12
When asked why he did not follow the board’s directions, Dr. Paullin stated that this configuring of grades was the most “safe and cost-effective.”
Most of the one-story elementary buildings will become lower elementary schools and the multi-story buildings will become upper elementary in this plan. The plan also calls for moving the REAL school to the former Caddy Vista building, returning Gifford to a junior high school and making Olympia Brown a high school. It should be noted that with this plan, the northern part of the district will be left without a school for its 4th-6th graders( which will require more busing, I imagine). The plan also did not account for the current magnet schools at the elementary level, either.
It should also be noted that the following price tags for the plan do not include ANY new buildings, or takes in consideration the population shift from the city to the outlying areas. The plan simply calls for fixing up the buildings we have; it does not address the fact that the buildings are still not where the people with children are.
Here’s a rough estimate of what the plan will cost the district:
Early Education - $44MM
Lower Elementary - $52MM
Upper Elementary - $72MM
Junior High - $83MM
Senior High - $122MM
The biggest understatement of the evening came at the beginning of the presentation, Dr. Paullin said the study did not take in the “political realities” of our district. Do you think so? We do not have the use the plan, but after spending $1.2MM it would be not be in the district’s best financial interests to ignore it. But to use it without modifications (such as addressing the magnet schools and the growing suburbs) may be political suicide.
First off, the board had instructed Dr. Paullin to do the facility study with the following grade configurations: K-6, 7-9, and 10-12. As you all should be aware, RUSD is planning to offer 4-year old kindergarten in the fall so the plan had to be changed midway through the process (This is one of the many reasons that report is 6 months overdue!) However, the board received the results of the $1.2MM study with the following grade configurations:
Early Childhood (3,4, and 5 year olds)
Grades 1-3 (Lower Elementary)
Grades 4-6 (Upper Elementary)
Grades 7-9
Grades 10-12
When asked why he did not follow the board’s directions, Dr. Paullin stated that this configuring of grades was the most “safe and cost-effective.”
Most of the one-story elementary buildings will become lower elementary schools and the multi-story buildings will become upper elementary in this plan. The plan also calls for moving the REAL school to the former Caddy Vista building, returning Gifford to a junior high school and making Olympia Brown a high school. It should be noted that with this plan, the northern part of the district will be left without a school for its 4th-6th graders( which will require more busing, I imagine). The plan also did not account for the current magnet schools at the elementary level, either.
It should also be noted that the following price tags for the plan do not include ANY new buildings, or takes in consideration the population shift from the city to the outlying areas. The plan simply calls for fixing up the buildings we have; it does not address the fact that the buildings are still not where the people with children are.
Here’s a rough estimate of what the plan will cost the district:
Early Education - $44MM
Lower Elementary - $52MM
Upper Elementary - $72MM
Junior High - $83MM
Senior High - $122MM
The biggest understatement of the evening came at the beginning of the presentation, Dr. Paullin said the study did not take in the “political realities” of our district. Do you think so? We do not have the use the plan, but after spending $1.2MM it would be not be in the district’s best financial interests to ignore it. But to use it without modifications (such as addressing the magnet schools and the growing suburbs) may be political suicide.
Should Taxpayers Fund Preschool?
Last week, the voters of California overwhelmingly voted against a universal preschool initiative, 61% to 39%. Why should anyone in Wisconsin, or Racine for that matter, care about what happens in the state of California? It is relevant because RUSD is introducing 4-year old kindergarten for the upcoming 2006-2007 school year, and did so without seeking the approval of the voters, as California did. At the April 3rd board meeting, one of the financial consultants said that the taxpayers should not have a chance at voting for preschool because the community might not support it.
So without prior taxpayer approval, the leaders of our district have decided to offer preschool to all residents of the district despite the fact that many of our schools simply do not have enough room for additional classes. Local preschools and daycare centers have been approached to house the upcoming class of 4 year olds. Why, when grants are available to fund the upstart of early education initiatives, is RUSD seeking to borrow the money to fund the program?
It should be noted that I am a strong advocate of early education; I sent both of my children to 2 years of preschool before sending them off to kindergarten, but I do not feel that universal preschool should be paid for by tax dollars. Preschool should be the responsibility of the parents, not the taxpayers. We already have early education for those children who meet certain guidelines (financial and academic); why not expand those programs if we need to? Offering “free” preschool for the masses is the not best stewardship of our tax dollars. When did our schools become a substitute for the family structure?
Surprisingly, the voters of California agreed and defeated Proposition 82. Sadly, the voters of Racine County were not given the same chance.
So without prior taxpayer approval, the leaders of our district have decided to offer preschool to all residents of the district despite the fact that many of our schools simply do not have enough room for additional classes. Local preschools and daycare centers have been approached to house the upcoming class of 4 year olds. Why, when grants are available to fund the upstart of early education initiatives, is RUSD seeking to borrow the money to fund the program?
It should be noted that I am a strong advocate of early education; I sent both of my children to 2 years of preschool before sending them off to kindergarten, but I do not feel that universal preschool should be paid for by tax dollars. Preschool should be the responsibility of the parents, not the taxpayers. We already have early education for those children who meet certain guidelines (financial and academic); why not expand those programs if we need to? Offering “free” preschool for the masses is the not best stewardship of our tax dollars. When did our schools become a substitute for the family structure?
Surprisingly, the voters of California agreed and defeated Proposition 82. Sadly, the voters of Racine County were not given the same chance.
Saturday, June 10, 2006
“The times, they are a-changin’”
To quote Bob Dylan, “the times they are a-changin’”. I have recently learned that plans have been made to put the board meeting materials, commonly known as board packets, on Racine Unified’s website. I was informed that June 26th is the tentative date for this to happen. Now, I am not exactly sure if my constant badgering, letters to the editor or musings on this blog have anything to do with the decision to post the meeting documents online, but I’d like to think I had something to do with it.
Being able to view the same information that the 9 board members have might help explain many of the decisions they make. It appears that RUSD is finally trying to reach out to the community. Let’s hope this new era of openness continues.
Being able to view the same information that the 9 board members have might help explain many of the decisions they make. It appears that RUSD is finally trying to reach out to the community. Let’s hope this new era of openness continues.
Does RUSD have communication issues?
"I'm relieved. It doesn't give us a great pause. We still have a lot of big issues," said School Board member Randy Bangs. "The vote demonstrates we need to do a better job linking with the community and addressing core issues."
From the June 6th online edition of The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=432725
Randy is right, RUSD does not do a very good job communicating with the community. I think broadcasting the bi-monthly meetings on Channel 20, RUSD’s cable access channel, might be a good start to start “linking” with the community.
I also think that including the information that the board members and media receive, commonly known as board packets, on the district’s website would also be beneficial.
If parents, voters and community members really understood the issues, wouldn’t we all be better off?
What are some other things that RUSD can do to better in linking with the community? Your thoughts or ideas? Post them here (it won’t cost you anything!!)
From the June 6th online edition of The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=432725
Randy is right, RUSD does not do a very good job communicating with the community. I think broadcasting the bi-monthly meetings on Channel 20, RUSD’s cable access channel, might be a good start to start “linking” with the community.
I also think that including the information that the board members and media receive, commonly known as board packets, on the district’s website would also be beneficial.
If parents, voters and community members really understood the issues, wouldn’t we all be better off?
What are some other things that RUSD can do to better in linking with the community? Your thoughts or ideas? Post them here (it won’t cost you anything!!)
Friday, June 09, 2006
Are We Dumb, or “Racine-Dumb”?
The smoke has cleared, the dust is settling and life returns to the residents of eastern Racine County. Only now, after the bitter and nonproductive name-calling (from both sides!!), can we begin to understand the ramifications of the results of the June 6th referendum. To borrow a phrase from our favorite conservative talk show host, we are not only dumb, but “Racine-Dumb”.
By voting yes, we have condoned the continuing financial mismanagement of this district. What mismanagement, some might say? Here is a short list:
1. Selling valuable vacant land ($1.2MM) to fund a facility study that examined countertops, floors and what would constitute a “dream classroom”. I would have thought that the consultant would have provided blueprints, but alas, rumor has it The Paullin Group had to subcontract out those important duties.
2. I have also heard that the Paullin Group was not the lowest bidder. Open Records Requests have been filed to confirm this. It would not surprise me if it was true.
3. Paying the financial consultant group up to $304,000 in incentives because they found revenue enhancements. As you might know, one of the consultants, Nick Alioto, was the former business manager for Kenosha’s school district. Because Kenosha is similar in size and geographical location most of our revenues and expenditures would be comparable. All that would be needed was to do a line-by-line comparison of the districts’ financial statements and investigate the differences. I understand that incentives are used regularly in the business world, but I believe they have no place in governmental contracts. Couldn’t that $304,000 be better spent in the classroom?
4. On April 3rd, the financial consultant group, Public Business Consulting Group, was awarded a five-year, $2.5MM contract. When asked if this was a violation of Executive Limitation 6.7, (where the CEO cannot “commit to any single, budgeted purchase or expenditure greater than $75,000), our CEO said that there was not any violation since he had autonomous control over hiring district personnel. What the board, administration, and our local print media fail to realize is that this is NOT hiring district personnel; this is a service contract.
UPDATE 5-9-07:
Changes have been made to the executive limitations sometime since last April. The superintendent can now approve service contracts, provided they are for professional services (such as PBCG).
Please remember when the next referendum is placed on the ballot that our administration’s actions speak louder than words. Most of the big business decisions have nothing to do with children or the classroom. Our Board of Education, has given him free rein and has failed all of us miserably. How can this district focus on what is important – children and academics, when so much time and resources are being invested in everything but.
By voting yes, we have condoned the continuing financial mismanagement of this district. What mismanagement, some might say? Here is a short list:
1. Selling valuable vacant land ($1.2MM) to fund a facility study that examined countertops, floors and what would constitute a “dream classroom”. I would have thought that the consultant would have provided blueprints, but alas, rumor has it The Paullin Group had to subcontract out those important duties.
2. I have also heard that the Paullin Group was not the lowest bidder. Open Records Requests have been filed to confirm this. It would not surprise me if it was true.
3. Paying the financial consultant group up to $304,000 in incentives because they found revenue enhancements. As you might know, one of the consultants, Nick Alioto, was the former business manager for Kenosha’s school district. Because Kenosha is similar in size and geographical location most of our revenues and expenditures would be comparable. All that would be needed was to do a line-by-line comparison of the districts’ financial statements and investigate the differences. I understand that incentives are used regularly in the business world, but I believe they have no place in governmental contracts. Couldn’t that $304,000 be better spent in the classroom?
4. On April 3rd, the financial consultant group, Public Business Consulting Group, was awarded a five-year, $2.5MM contract. When asked if this was a violation of Executive Limitation 6.7, (where the CEO cannot “commit to any single, budgeted purchase or expenditure greater than $75,000), our CEO said that there was not any violation since he had autonomous control over hiring district personnel. What the board, administration, and our local print media fail to realize is that this is NOT hiring district personnel; this is a service contract.
UPDATE 5-9-07:
Changes have been made to the executive limitations sometime since last April. The superintendent can now approve service contracts, provided they are for professional services (such as PBCG).
Please remember when the next referendum is placed on the ballot that our administration’s actions speak louder than words. Most of the big business decisions have nothing to do with children or the classroom. Our Board of Education, has given him free rein and has failed all of us miserably. How can this district focus on what is important – children and academics, when so much time and resources are being invested in everything but.
Thursday, June 08, 2006
Where to Go From Here?
However I feel about the outcome of Tuesday’s election, I am thankful for one thing. Hundreds of teachers and educational assistants would probably have lost their jobs if the referendum failed. I do NOT believe this would have been necessary, but due to the misguided priorities of our district’s management, it certainly would have been the easiest way to balance the budget.
Instead of dealing with the inefficiencies of Central Office, our leadership continually holds teachers, sports and programs hostage to get the money they want. This practice will continue to work, unless we make them stop.
Please take this opportunity to become more involved and learn about the decision-making process our board and administration use. If all of us were as concerned about our schools as we claim to be, I believe that we would be having a very different discussion.
Board meetings are held the 1st and 3rd Mondays at 6:30PM at our district’s Central Office. Unfortunately, this is the only way to stay informed. Unlike other districts, RUSD does not broadcast the board meetings on Channel 20 or publish the board meeting materials online.
If you think, like I do, that they should operate in a more open environment please contact our board.
Instead of dealing with the inefficiencies of Central Office, our leadership continually holds teachers, sports and programs hostage to get the money they want. This practice will continue to work, unless we make them stop.
Please take this opportunity to become more involved and learn about the decision-making process our board and administration use. If all of us were as concerned about our schools as we claim to be, I believe that we would be having a very different discussion.
Board meetings are held the 1st and 3rd Mondays at 6:30PM at our district’s Central Office. Unfortunately, this is the only way to stay informed. Unlike other districts, RUSD does not broadcast the board meetings on Channel 20 or publish the board meeting materials online.
If you think, like I do, that they should operate in a more open environment please contact our board.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
