Response to JT Commentary

My husband still smells of coffee from the shower I gave him this morning while reading the paper. Reading the commentary regarding the possible Caledonia advisory referendum over my first cup of java was not such a good idea in retrospect; I actually spewed coffee in my disbelief of what I was reading.

There are many things I feel were not represented well, but I will only cover a few here, perhaps I might even answer some of his many questions:

I wonder where you believe you will find the money to purchase or build new schools?

After paying millions to RUSD each year for the last 35 years, I would imagine that the citizens of Caledonia have to have at least some equity in the buildings residing within the village limits.

I wonder where you will find the money to hire people to run and teach in those schools you will build or buy.

I imagine it will be the same place RUSD gets their money – state and local property taxes.

How will you achieve the diversity required by federal law in those schools?

Racial diversity is required? Really, please inform Burlington, Oak Creek, Waukesha and the other hundreds of districts in Wisconsin that they are in violation of those federal laws. I believe the law states the district must reflect the makeup of the municipality. Besides, if you think Caledonia does not have ANY racial diversity, you are mistaken.

The money issues alone need to be answered before irresponsible and in some cases uninformed comments are made.

The Village is NOT making any decisions, voting in favor of the advisory referendum WILL NOT create a new district. Voting YES will only authorize the Village to investigate the financial impact of creating a new district. If the end result is a double in taxes I doubt ANYONE would support going forth. After the millions wasted on consultants in RUSD without any taxpayer approval , I applaud the Village of Caledonia of asking first, spending later.