The Journal Times is reporting that 3 citizens have thrown their proverbial hats in the ring for the RUSD Board seat vacated by Randy Bangs earlier this month - the candidates are: Reverend Hargrove, Joyce Gregg and Stella Young.
All 3 candidates are worthy of the position from what I have witnessed in the past.
It's also refreshing to know that all 3 candidates seem have a leg up on the issues, or at the very least, have attended MANY meetings in the past!
So often school board candidates seem to come out of nowhere - I cannot tell you how many
times I witness candidates attending their FIRST meeting soon after their nomination papers are filed! (Picking out "new" faces is actually quite easy, as RUSD meetings are often poorly attended unless there is a "crisis"at hand )
I am not suggesting that you cannot keep yourself up-to-date on the issues by reading a newspaper or forums such as this one, but it definitely helps if you have first-hand knowledge and hear the board conversations in their entirety and in proper context.
Good luck to all 3 candidates! I know each of you will bring an unique perspective to the board floor!
Showing posts with label RUSD Board. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RUSD Board. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Fixing a Hole
I'm fixing a hole where the rain gets in
And stops my mind from wandering
Where it will go...
My apologies to John and Paul, but these lyrics came to mind as I was reviewing the RUSD board materials (for tomorrow's meeting) over my morning coffee. It would seem that the RUSD board will be addressing changes in their current governing style, Policy Governance, to address the loopholes that directly led to the recent changes in district leadership.
Over and over again, the audit report written by Reinhart-Boerner included the phrase "lack of oversight" and suggested that Policy Governance possibly left too many "holes" in the financial management of the district. The board seems to be addressing these "holes", not by throwing out Policy Governance, but by rewriting some of the language. I'm glad our current board acknowledges that some of the Executive Limitations were too broadly written, and that the board is now seeking to remedy the situation.
Here 's a brief summary of some of the proposed changes, the bolded text is the proposed change in language, the text in italics is the existing language:
Policy Type: Executive Limitations
Accordingly, the CEO may not:
Fail to publish a financial condition statement annually. Fail to provide the Board with a monthly update of the Statement of Revenue and Expenditures and Balance Sheet depicting month and year-to-date financial activity as well as a financial condition statement annually.
a.Fail to use a competitive bidding procedure for the purchase of all supplies, materials and equipment, and any contracted services except professional services, in the amount of $25,000 or more.
b. Fail to use a competitive bidding procedure for professional services in the amount of $50,000 or more except for replacement positions within the Teaching and Learning Division.
c. Execute a contract which includes financial incentives to a third party without Board approval.
Hindsight is 20/20, obviously if these changes in policy language were included from the get-go, it is very likely that the RUSD board would not have to be renegotiating terms with PBCG, the consultant group hired by the former superintendent to manage the district's business affairs, but, instead, could be focusing on the issues that might actually benefit the children of RUSD educationally.
It's about time the board "fixes the hole" and focuses their collective time and energy on achieving their goal of educating every student to succeed.
And stops my mind from wandering
Where it will go...
My apologies to John and Paul, but these lyrics came to mind as I was reviewing the RUSD board materials (for tomorrow's meeting) over my morning coffee. It would seem that the RUSD board will be addressing changes in their current governing style, Policy Governance, to address the loopholes that directly led to the recent changes in district leadership.
Over and over again, the audit report written by Reinhart-Boerner included the phrase "lack of oversight" and suggested that Policy Governance possibly left too many "holes" in the financial management of the district. The board seems to be addressing these "holes", not by throwing out Policy Governance, but by rewriting some of the language. I'm glad our current board acknowledges that some of the Executive Limitations were too broadly written, and that the board is now seeking to remedy the situation.
Here 's a brief summary of some of the proposed changes, the bolded text is the proposed change in language, the text in italics is the existing language:
Policy Type: Executive Limitations
Accordingly, the CEO may not:
Fail to publish a financial condition statement annually. Fail to provide the Board with a monthly update of the Statement of Revenue and Expenditures and Balance Sheet depicting month and year-to-date financial activity as well as a financial condition statement annually.
a.Fail to use a competitive bidding procedure for the purchase of all supplies, materials and equipment, and any contracted services except professional services, in the amount of $25,000 or more.
b. Fail to use a competitive bidding procedure for professional services in the amount of $50,000 or more except for replacement positions within the Teaching and Learning Division.
c. Execute a contract which includes financial incentives to a third party without Board approval.
Hindsight is 20/20, obviously if these changes in policy language were included from the get-go, it is very likely that the RUSD board would not have to be renegotiating terms with PBCG, the consultant group hired by the former superintendent to manage the district's business affairs, but, instead, could be focusing on the issues that might actually benefit the children of RUSD educationally.
It's about time the board "fixes the hole" and focuses their collective time and energy on achieving their goal of educating every student to succeed.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
The Gunfight at the RTA Corral
Okay, so maybe my headline for this post is a tad bit overdramatic... But like that famous fight that symbolized the struggle between law and order and the rampant banditry of the American Old West, the Racine Taxpayers Association met with the RUSD Interim Superintendent and Board President yesterday for what was probably a very lively luncheon meeting.
I am coming to the realization that politics DO play a major part in education, although I still believe that education should be a non-partisan issue. In my humble opinion, taxpayers have a right to question financial decisions, after all, it is our money and we have a right to understand how it is being spent. But because the tax money is used for something that is intangible - education - sometimes lines get drawn in the sand. It becomes an Us vs Them issue - I know I have fallen into this frame of mind many times before. This is something I am continually addressing and trying to overcome.
The Journal Times reported that the PBCG contract was one of the many issues discussed - please allow me to pontificate briefly on that topic. While I completely understand the need for secrecy at this time, or as Baumgardt stated, to "keep my mouth shut" until the renegotiations are complete and voted on in an Open Session meeting, I do have some concerns.
Frankly, I am worried about any negative political fall-out from any decision that may be perceived as a bad one (financially speaking) by the taxpayers of eastern Racine County.
The district has decaying buildings that are literally stuffed to the gills with children - not the best learning environment for anyone, to say the least. (We treat our criminals better!) The district will need to address its facilities soon via spending referenda; the trust and support of the district by the citizens it serves is needed.
I have written about my feelings about the PBCG contract numerous times for nearly 2 years now - I am not going to repeat myself.
But I will say this - I certainly hope that any deal brokered with PBCG is one that the public can bear. What sort of compensation can the public bear and accept? That is the unknown; I know the amount I would give them if I sat on the board, but hey, my opinion doesn't matter.
Or does it?
I am coming to the realization that politics DO play a major part in education, although I still believe that education should be a non-partisan issue. In my humble opinion, taxpayers have a right to question financial decisions, after all, it is our money and we have a right to understand how it is being spent. But because the tax money is used for something that is intangible - education - sometimes lines get drawn in the sand. It becomes an Us vs Them issue - I know I have fallen into this frame of mind many times before. This is something I am continually addressing and trying to overcome.
The Journal Times reported that the PBCG contract was one of the many issues discussed - please allow me to pontificate briefly on that topic. While I completely understand the need for secrecy at this time, or as Baumgardt stated, to "keep my mouth shut" until the renegotiations are complete and voted on in an Open Session meeting, I do have some concerns.
Frankly, I am worried about any negative political fall-out from any decision that may be perceived as a bad one (financially speaking) by the taxpayers of eastern Racine County.
The district has decaying buildings that are literally stuffed to the gills with children - not the best learning environment for anyone, to say the least. (We treat our criminals better!) The district will need to address its facilities soon via spending referenda; the trust and support of the district by the citizens it serves is needed.
I have written about my feelings about the PBCG contract numerous times for nearly 2 years now - I am not going to repeat myself.
But I will say this - I certainly hope that any deal brokered with PBCG is one that the public can bear. What sort of compensation can the public bear and accept? That is the unknown; I know the amount I would give them if I sat on the board, but hey, my opinion doesn't matter.
Or does it?
Monday, November 12, 2007
Special Education: Not a place but a process
After the Independent Commission released its report in 2006 - it identified that 2 things should happen (in the area of special education):
1. The district needed to create a task force to examine the current special education delivery model to better align resources with meeting needs.
2. Teachers, parents, outside experts and internal special education managers should work together explore best practice models nationwide, and to formulate a new approach for special education in Racine.
In the spring of last year, Renee Pfaller (who recently resigned), gave a presentation on Special Education to the RUSD board. It was decided at the time that an in-depth analysis should be done. So the study was commissioned, and tonight the board studied the long-awaited report completed by UWM's Elise Frattura, an expert in Exceptional Education.
My head is still spinning from all the information shared in such a short time, and the results may be shocking to some, but I was not completely surprised by any of the key findings.
I already knew that our district over-identifies children of color, and I understand the devastating effects that this can have on a child. We all know the statistics, don't we? Kids "labeled" are more likely to have disciplinary problems, truancy issues, and are statistically more likely to develop alcohol and drug problems! We won't even discuss that over-identifying children takes valuable resources away from the children who really do need the services.
I am sure I will write more in the weeks and months to come, but the most important theme I want to convey is this - the way the district currently delivers special education services is outdated and does not serve the best interest of the child.
Busing a child across town for Speech, because that is where the Speech teacher happens to be, is wrong. The child should be served in his or her own school whenever possible. Instead of moving the kids all over the district - move the teacher. Nearly 1/2 of our busing budget is spent on busing these children needlessly. Over 38% of children with disabilities do not attend the school they would normally attend if they were not disabled.
Also, when students do not attend the school they would attend if not disabled, natural proportions of students with disabilities in the receiving school is exceeded. Segregating these children into a few schools is wrong. The Supreme Court says that children cannot be segregated by color - so the same policy and laws should apply here as well.
Chief Justice Warren delivered the opinion that "separate facilities are inherently unequal" - we all need to start thinking that special education is not a place, but a process. Then, and only then, will we really making sure that the district is educating EVERY child.
1. The district needed to create a task force to examine the current special education delivery model to better align resources with meeting needs.
2. Teachers, parents, outside experts and internal special education managers should work together explore best practice models nationwide, and to formulate a new approach for special education in Racine.
In the spring of last year, Renee Pfaller (who recently resigned), gave a presentation on Special Education to the RUSD board. It was decided at the time that an in-depth analysis should be done. So the study was commissioned, and tonight the board studied the long-awaited report completed by UWM's Elise Frattura, an expert in Exceptional Education.
My head is still spinning from all the information shared in such a short time, and the results may be shocking to some, but I was not completely surprised by any of the key findings.
I already knew that our district over-identifies children of color, and I understand the devastating effects that this can have on a child. We all know the statistics, don't we? Kids "labeled" are more likely to have disciplinary problems, truancy issues, and are statistically more likely to develop alcohol and drug problems! We won't even discuss that over-identifying children takes valuable resources away from the children who really do need the services.
I am sure I will write more in the weeks and months to come, but the most important theme I want to convey is this - the way the district currently delivers special education services is outdated and does not serve the best interest of the child.
Busing a child across town for Speech, because that is where the Speech teacher happens to be, is wrong. The child should be served in his or her own school whenever possible. Instead of moving the kids all over the district - move the teacher. Nearly 1/2 of our busing budget is spent on busing these children needlessly. Over 38% of children with disabilities do not attend the school they would normally attend if they were not disabled.
Also, when students do not attend the school they would attend if not disabled, natural proportions of students with disabilities in the receiving school is exceeded. Segregating these children into a few schools is wrong. The Supreme Court says that children cannot be segregated by color - so the same policy and laws should apply here as well.
Chief Justice Warren delivered the opinion that "separate facilities are inherently unequal" - we all need to start thinking that special education is not a place, but a process. Then, and only then, will we really making sure that the district is educating EVERY child.
Meetings, meetings and more meetings!
The RUSD board is again having a special meeting tonight, followed by a work session that will discuss the recent Special Education Study. It certainly seems like the board is working hard, at least if you look at the number of times they have been meeting lately. Let's hope these meetings are fruitful!
The special meeting will commence at 5:30PM and will adjourn to Executive Session to update the board members of the renegotiations of the PBCG contract. As many of you are aware, PBCG was hired by the district to oversee the business operations of the district, and were the focus of the recent audit done by Reinhart-Boerner, a Milwaukee legal firm. The board has trying to negotiate a settlement with PBCG since the initial results of the audit have been made public.
I only hope that a settlement is soon to come, and it is one that public can accept. The board needs to regain the trust of the citizens of eastern Racine County in a very big way.
The special meeting will commence at 5:30PM and will adjourn to Executive Session to update the board members of the renegotiations of the PBCG contract. As many of you are aware, PBCG was hired by the district to oversee the business operations of the district, and were the focus of the recent audit done by Reinhart-Boerner, a Milwaukee legal firm. The board has trying to negotiate a settlement with PBCG since the initial results of the audit have been made public.
I only hope that a settlement is soon to come, and it is one that public can accept. The board needs to regain the trust of the citizens of eastern Racine County in a very big way.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Is "second shift" the solution to overcrowding?
A couple of years back, the Racine area school district commissioned a long-term facilities study. While not much has been written about the Paullin study, I would like to talk about one aspect of it briefly today.
In this study, it was pointed out that the big 3 high schools (Case, Horlick and Park) were originally designed for 1200-1400 students, yet we have 2000-2200 students in these schools. They were overcrowded way back when I started high school, and the problem definitely escalated the year I was a senior - this the year 9th graders were moved to our high schools.
Why move an additional 500-600 students into already crowded schools? It has been explained to me that the most accurate data model the district had in 1983 had projected the district was going to lose 7000 students within a very short amount of time. The district was going to go from 22,000 to 15,000 students , so the move made sense at the time.
Of course nearly 25 years later, we have seen that this did NOT happen. The district may have lost some students, but there are still over 21,000 students being serviced by RUSD - and our high schools are still dangerously overcrowded.
Other communites, like West Bend, are coming up with some creative ways to address overcrowding. Ironically, one of the ideas suggested for West Bend has been proposed by a former RUSD board member in the past - having the high schools operate on a split-shift schedule.
Is this a viable solution to help solve the over-crowding at our high schools?
Of course, the easiest solution would be to remove the 9th graders from the high schools, but in order for that to happen the district's 6th graders need to return to the elementary builidings. Because of the recently expanded 4 and 5 year old kindergarten programming, there is no longer room in these buildings for the 6th graders. So now, new buildings need to be built somewhere in the community.
I believe RUSD must soon address the over-crowding in our high schools. They have been overcrowded for decades, and some kind of decision is long overdue.
If you were in charge, how would you meet this challenge? Build more buildings, create a split-shift schedule, or some other solution?
In this study, it was pointed out that the big 3 high schools (Case, Horlick and Park) were originally designed for 1200-1400 students, yet we have 2000-2200 students in these schools. They were overcrowded way back when I started high school, and the problem definitely escalated the year I was a senior - this the year 9th graders were moved to our high schools.
Why move an additional 500-600 students into already crowded schools? It has been explained to me that the most accurate data model the district had in 1983 had projected the district was going to lose 7000 students within a very short amount of time. The district was going to go from 22,000 to 15,000 students , so the move made sense at the time.
Of course nearly 25 years later, we have seen that this did NOT happen. The district may have lost some students, but there are still over 21,000 students being serviced by RUSD - and our high schools are still dangerously overcrowded.
Other communites, like West Bend, are coming up with some creative ways to address overcrowding. Ironically, one of the ideas suggested for West Bend has been proposed by a former RUSD board member in the past - having the high schools operate on a split-shift schedule.
Is this a viable solution to help solve the over-crowding at our high schools?
Of course, the easiest solution would be to remove the 9th graders from the high schools, but in order for that to happen the district's 6th graders need to return to the elementary builidings. Because of the recently expanded 4 and 5 year old kindergarten programming, there is no longer room in these buildings for the 6th graders. So now, new buildings need to be built somewhere in the community.
I believe RUSD must soon address the over-crowding in our high schools. They have been overcrowded for decades, and some kind of decision is long overdue.
If you were in charge, how would you meet this challenge? Build more buildings, create a split-shift schedule, or some other solution?
Thursday, November 08, 2007
What if you threw a party and nobody came?
(Photo courtesy of www.racinepost.com)Earlier this week, there was a historic meeting of sorts at City Hall. Members of the RUSD communication meeting met with the legislators of the city of Racine. A similar event happened earlier in the year when a RUSD board committee met with the trustees of the outlying villages in the district (Caledonia, Mt. Pleasant, Sturtevant, Wind Point, etc). Their collective goal is to better understand the problems faced and to work TOGETHER to find solutions!
What amazes me is this! It's not that the RUSD board is asking for help, but that these meetings are so poorly attended by the lay members of the community!
Although, the meeting with the villages was better attended than the one in the city - it was still sparsely attended. Perhaps the city meeting was not well advertised, I certainly hope that is the reason.
I cannot believe that the reason is that so few people care...
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Breaking News - Apathy thrives in Racine
(click on picture to enlarge)Seriously, over half of the respondents have just given up on Unified? Don't you all realize how much the public can effect change? Whether its blogging, attending rallies, public hearings or even RUSD public input sessions - the power of the Joe or Jane Public is HUGE!
I seriously hope that most of the NO respondents simply just had a bad day, and instead of kicking Fido, they took out their frustrations via their computer and mouse.
If the public will not speak, how in the hell are things supposed to get any better?
Monday, November 05, 2007
RUSD board to fill vacant seat
Tonight, thankfully, the RUSD board voted to fill the vacant seat left by Randy Bangs. I was worried that they would not fill the seat (boards have odd number of members for a reason, you know!). The board also clarified the timeline in which this would happen, as outlined in state statutes and their own board policies.
Within a week, there will be a public notice letting the public know of the vacancy - then any citizen interested in the position has two weeks to contact any board member in order to be nominated. The board member may then turn those nominations over to the board president.
On December 3rd, those candidates would be interviewed (in open session) and then the board (again in open session) will choose a new candidate.
Hopefully, there will be many qualified candidates to choose from - any future board member needs to understand that there are MANY important issues facing the district this year. The board cannot simply slow down the process even more to bring a new board member up-to-speed on the issues.
Within a week, there will be a public notice letting the public know of the vacancy - then any citizen interested in the position has two weeks to contact any board member in order to be nominated. The board member may then turn those nominations over to the board president.
On December 3rd, those candidates would be interviewed (in open session) and then the board (again in open session) will choose a new candidate.
Hopefully, there will be many qualified candidates to choose from - any future board member needs to understand that there are MANY important issues facing the district this year. The board cannot simply slow down the process even more to bring a new board member up-to-speed on the issues.
RUSD board member resigns
Tonight, at 7:00PM, the RUSD Board of Education will be having a special meeting. The first action item on the agenda is accepting the resignation of a board member. One can only assume, from the reports of last week, is that the board member in question is Mr. Randy Bangs.
Mr. Bangs, often viewed as the "contentious" one, was relentless when looking for facts and data. You may have not liked or appreciated his very direct approach, but he did bring many things into question. Some of past board practices he questioned, we all know now (thanks to the recent audit) were really all not that great for the district as a whole.
So let me first thank Mr. Bangs for his diligent work on the board before I start obsessing over his replacement on the board, or worse yet, the lack of a replacement.
Thank you, Randy, for your years of diligent service.
Now back to obsessing... I believe the board (as a collective being) is not quite sure if someone should be appointed for the remaining 6 months of Mr. Bang's term. While I understand that it would take a special person to serve the remaining months of Mr. Bangs' term, I do think if certain individuals were interested - the spot should be filled.
The candidate should already be well-versed on the upcoming issues - there isn't time to bring someone up-to-speed. The candidate should understand the sometimes dysfunctional dynamics of the board, and most of all, be genuinely excited about all the positive changes administration is bringing to the table.
Now, I wonder where the board would find someone like that?
Mr. Bangs, often viewed as the "contentious" one, was relentless when looking for facts and data. You may have not liked or appreciated his very direct approach, but he did bring many things into question. Some of past board practices he questioned, we all know now (thanks to the recent audit) were really all not that great for the district as a whole.
So let me first thank Mr. Bangs for his diligent work on the board before I start obsessing over his replacement on the board, or worse yet, the lack of a replacement.
Thank you, Randy, for your years of diligent service.
Now back to obsessing... I believe the board (as a collective being) is not quite sure if someone should be appointed for the remaining 6 months of Mr. Bang's term. While I understand that it would take a special person to serve the remaining months of Mr. Bangs' term, I do think if certain individuals were interested - the spot should be filled.
The candidate should already be well-versed on the upcoming issues - there isn't time to bring someone up-to-speed. The candidate should understand the sometimes dysfunctional dynamics of the board, and most of all, be genuinely excited about all the positive changes administration is bringing to the table.
Now, I wonder where the board would find someone like that?
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
More thoughts on the RUSD board postponing redistricting
I have had 24 hours or so to assimilate the recent RUSD board decision to postpone a decision on redistricting, and I have a few more thoughts on the matter. Dr. Warner, the board member that proposed creating consensus by reaching out to the community for answers, does make a couple of excellent points.
1. This board, and past boards, have not effectively reached out to the community. All of the past efforts were kind of last-minute hodge-podge attempts, and the forums that were held were often not well attended by many sectors of the community.
2. Past community efforts have not built consensus in the community. I believe it is because most of these community efforts were broad-based and open-ended, meaning there were ambiguous questions and people were free to discuss just about anything they wanted.
While these kind of forums are great, what ended up happening (I believe) is that the faciliators asked, "What would make a great school district"? to 400 people and got back 400 different answers.
I'm not an expert on data collection, but maybe any future efforts should drill down to the answers that board and administration are actually seeking.
I do know this, however, any hardline action either way will most likely tick off at least 50% of the population. It is clear, in my mind anyway, that some sort of compromise is needed.
We need good schools for EVERY child in Racine, and the parents are the best judge of what school is best for their child. It could be a magnet school, a school down the street, or a school close to the parent's place of employment.
We already have school choice within the district, and it is extremely popular, why not just expand it and create a 100% choice district?
1. This board, and past boards, have not effectively reached out to the community. All of the past efforts were kind of last-minute hodge-podge attempts, and the forums that were held were often not well attended by many sectors of the community.
2. Past community efforts have not built consensus in the community. I believe it is because most of these community efforts were broad-based and open-ended, meaning there were ambiguous questions and people were free to discuss just about anything they wanted.
While these kind of forums are great, what ended up happening (I believe) is that the faciliators asked, "What would make a great school district"? to 400 people and got back 400 different answers.
I'm not an expert on data collection, but maybe any future efforts should drill down to the answers that board and administration are actually seeking.
I do know this, however, any hardline action either way will most likely tick off at least 50% of the population. It is clear, in my mind anyway, that some sort of compromise is needed.
We need good schools for EVERY child in Racine, and the parents are the best judge of what school is best for their child. It could be a magnet school, a school down the street, or a school close to the parent's place of employment.
We already have school choice within the district, and it is extremely popular, why not just expand it and create a 100% choice district?
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Unified puts off redistricting again
I have to admit I was not surprised by the headline Unified puts off redistricting in today’s paper, however, I am extremely saddened and disappointed. Too many other things, like addressing special education needs and grade configuration, will now be delayed even further until the board makes a decision. Redistricting is the first step that needs to be taken, and the decision has been postponed for years:
It was delayed in March of 2004; the board then decided in August of that year to hold community forums to find out what the community wanted. These forums were held and the board received a full analysis a few months later.
A 2005 facility study showed that many schools were operating over the maximum capacity – citing the need for a massive redistricting.
In the beginning of the 2005 – 2006 school year, the board put redistricting as one of the big items that would be handled that year. However by February those plans to redistrict was put on hold once again.
In the beginning of the 2006 -2007 school year, the board again planned on addressing redistricting, along with grade configuration. I believe administration told the board that they would need a decision by February in order to implement the plan successfully. That date was changed to March 19th, but the board decided to postpone the decision once again, citing the need for more information.
I truly do understand that this is a difficult decision to make – but it is a decision that NEEDS to be made. Any decision made will probably infuriate 50% of the population – no decision will be a good one, politically-speaking, but the decision needs to be made quickly.
Does the board really want to postpone this for another year?
It was delayed in March of 2004; the board then decided in August of that year to hold community forums to find out what the community wanted. These forums were held and the board received a full analysis a few months later.
A 2005 facility study showed that many schools were operating over the maximum capacity – citing the need for a massive redistricting.
In the beginning of the 2005 – 2006 school year, the board put redistricting as one of the big items that would be handled that year. However by February those plans to redistrict was put on hold once again.
In the beginning of the 2006 -2007 school year, the board again planned on addressing redistricting, along with grade configuration. I believe administration told the board that they would need a decision by February in order to implement the plan successfully. That date was changed to March 19th, but the board decided to postpone the decision once again, citing the need for more information.
I truly do understand that this is a difficult decision to make – but it is a decision that NEEDS to be made. Any decision made will probably infuriate 50% of the population – no decision will be a good one, politically-speaking, but the decision needs to be made quickly.
Does the board really want to postpone this for another year?
Monday, October 29, 2007
Leaving Las Vegas
I returned this morning from a weekend trip to Vegas, we took the red-eye and got home about 7:00 am. I feel like doing nothing but sleeping because I think I got a total of 6-8 hours of sleep for the entire weekend, but it appears I should probably make an appearance at tonight's RUSD board meeting.
The board MAY finally make a decision on how the elementary schools will be redistricted, recommendations for the superintendent search firm will be made, and finally, the budget will be approved. Obviously, this is not a meeting that should be missed - there is bound to be ENDLESS and painful discussion on all topics.
But having just returned from Vegas I have an idea that will make the redistricting decision easier - use a Roulette Wheel!
Bet half on Black - Redistrict by socioeconomic status.
Bet half on Red - Redistrict using neighborhood schools.
The board cannot possibly make a decision that will make the entire community happy- face it letting the Roulette Wheel make the decision for them will at least make for a shorter meeting...
The board MAY finally make a decision on how the elementary schools will be redistricted, recommendations for the superintendent search firm will be made, and finally, the budget will be approved. Obviously, this is not a meeting that should be missed - there is bound to be ENDLESS and painful discussion on all topics.
But having just returned from Vegas I have an idea that will make the redistricting decision easier - use a Roulette Wheel!
Bet half on Black - Redistrict by socioeconomic status.
Bet half on Red - Redistrict using neighborhood schools.
The board cannot possibly make a decision that will make the entire community happy- face it letting the Roulette Wheel make the decision for them will at least make for a shorter meeting...
Monday, October 08, 2007
Redistricting by the numbers
Tonight, the RUSD Board had a work session on redistricting; they had an update from administration on the proposed scenarios which was followed by discussion. Schools should reflect the community they serve, and the board rightfully directed administration to redistrict the schools to reflect the Socio-Economic Status (SES) make-up of the community as best it could, as based on recommendations of the Equity and Access Committee.
OK – here’s the numbers, because I’m a numbers kind of person. The current SES for schools included in the study is 53% - which translates to 53% of the children qualify for free or reduced lunch. The RUSD board would like all of the schools in the study to use a SES guideline of 30-70% - basically plus or minus 20% the district average.
Redistricting Scenario #1:
District SES average for schools included in the study - 56.58%
Number of schools out of compliance with SES guidelines – 4
Redistricting Scenario #2:
District SES average for schools included in the study – 52.54%
Number of schools out of compliance with SES guidelines – 10
Redistricting Scenario #3:
District SES average for schools included in the study – 54.51%
Number of schools out of compliance with SES guidelines – 2
Simply looking at the percentages of SES, the 3 scenarios are not that far off from one another, that’s not the problem.
Numbers are easy to understand, it’s the “emotional quotient” of what these numbers represent that may be the problem.
Scenario #1 is our current configuration, which based on the recent Supreme Court decision, is illegal - so go ahead and scratch that one off the list.
Scenario #2 is where ALL children will have the opportunity to attend a school close to their home, and Scenario #3 is where children will be bussed to balance SES.
Of course, it’s not really about the numbers, is it? It should be about providing EVERY child with a great school filled with qualified teachers and educational opportunities that will engage EVERY child. There are advantages and disadvantages for each scenario which I’m sure will be discussed at length, but sometimes it’s easier to make an “emotional” decision when you have the facts before you. Let's try to keep these facts in the back of our minds as we go forward in our discussions.
OK – here’s the numbers, because I’m a numbers kind of person. The current SES for schools included in the study is 53% - which translates to 53% of the children qualify for free or reduced lunch. The RUSD board would like all of the schools in the study to use a SES guideline of 30-70% - basically plus or minus 20% the district average.
Redistricting Scenario #1:
District SES average for schools included in the study - 56.58%
Number of schools out of compliance with SES guidelines – 4
Redistricting Scenario #2:
District SES average for schools included in the study – 52.54%
Number of schools out of compliance with SES guidelines – 10
Redistricting Scenario #3:
District SES average for schools included in the study – 54.51%
Number of schools out of compliance with SES guidelines – 2
Simply looking at the percentages of SES, the 3 scenarios are not that far off from one another, that’s not the problem.
Numbers are easy to understand, it’s the “emotional quotient” of what these numbers represent that may be the problem.
Scenario #1 is our current configuration, which based on the recent Supreme Court decision, is illegal - so go ahead and scratch that one off the list.
Scenario #2 is where ALL children will have the opportunity to attend a school close to their home, and Scenario #3 is where children will be bussed to balance SES.
Of course, it’s not really about the numbers, is it? It should be about providing EVERY child with a great school filled with qualified teachers and educational opportunities that will engage EVERY child. There are advantages and disadvantages for each scenario which I’m sure will be discussed at length, but sometimes it’s easier to make an “emotional” decision when you have the facts before you. Let's try to keep these facts in the back of our minds as we go forward in our discussions.
Sunday, October 07, 2007
RUSD work session on redistricting planned
From the RUSD website: The Board of Education has scheduled a work session on Monday, October 8, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. at the Administrative Service Center in the Board room.
The topic of the work session will be update and discussion on redistricting by administration.
This may be one of the first times the public will see and hear the new interim superintendent, Dr. Jackson Parker speak. While I am confident that this meeting will not break any new ground in the sometimes contentious neighborhood/busing debate, I think it will be interesting to hear what the "newcomers" to the district have to say.
I'll try to post something immediately following the meeting tomorrow if time permits.
The topic of the work session will be update and discussion on redistricting by administration.
This may be one of the first times the public will see and hear the new interim superintendent, Dr. Jackson Parker speak. While I am confident that this meeting will not break any new ground in the sometimes contentious neighborhood/busing debate, I think it will be interesting to hear what the "newcomers" to the district have to say.
I'll try to post something immediately following the meeting tomorrow if time permits.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
PBCG Update
Just a quick note on the PBCG audit, the Racine Unified School Board Audit Committee will be meeting in executive session (closed to the public) on Monday, October 1st. The committee will be discussing the possibility of continuing the 2nd phase of the audit. As most of you are aware, the audit was released to the board on August 20th, so any decision made will DEFINITELY not be one made in haste.
Also, the full RUSD Board will meeting immediately after the committee meeting to discuss the ongoing negotiations with PBCG. Again, this meeting is in closed to the public, as allowed in Wisconsin statute 19.85 (1)(e). The sticking point, of course, is the $3.8M in unbilled incentives, which is based on future savings and revenue enhancements, NOT any realized savings.
Will the board send PBCG riding off into the sunset with money this district can ill afford, or will the RUSD board stand up for the children of this district? Facing another $3.8M shortfall will only hurt the children of this district with more cuts to the classroom.
Also, the full RUSD Board will meeting immediately after the committee meeting to discuss the ongoing negotiations with PBCG. Again, this meeting is in closed to the public, as allowed in Wisconsin statute 19.85 (1)(e). The sticking point, of course, is the $3.8M in unbilled incentives, which is based on future savings and revenue enhancements, NOT any realized savings.
Will the board send PBCG riding off into the sunset with money this district can ill afford, or will the RUSD board stand up for the children of this district? Facing another $3.8M shortfall will only hurt the children of this district with more cuts to the classroom.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Must see TV
I am consciously trying to point out the positive things that are going on in the district - there is enough negativity to go around. In that same vein, I will withhold all my negative comments regarding the inter-personal dysfunction of the board (as a collective unit) from last night's meeting. You can see it for yourself - as I mentioned earlier this year the business meeting is now being taped and will be shown on Channel 20.
Currently, the August business meeting is being shown. Start looking for last night's meeting next week or so, or simply consult the Television Programming Guide found on the district's new website.
I will say this though, I hope Mr. Hazen (the new interim/permanent CFO) didn't run screaming from the building last night after witnessing what has become a normal occurrence in the board room.
Currently, the August business meeting is being shown. Start looking for last night's meeting next week or so, or simply consult the Television Programming Guide found on the district's new website.
I will say this though, I hope Mr. Hazen (the new interim/permanent CFO) didn't run screaming from the building last night after witnessing what has become a normal occurrence in the board room.
Monday, September 24, 2007
RUSD Board to recommend interim superintendent?
Will the district be getting an interim superintendent soon?
It does appear that the board is closer to a decision in bringing some stability to the district since Dr. Hick's sudden departure 1 month ago. Tonight at 7:00PM is the regularly scheduled RUSD business meeting.By the action items on the agenda it does seem to indicate that the board is finally ready to publicly release possible choices for both interim superintendent and chief financial officer.
I imagine the recommendations will yield some very interesting and familiar names, simply because the situation at hand calls for candidates who are familiar with the trials and tribulations of the district.
Hopefully, the board can agree on the candidates chosen, so Dr. V (who is currently serving as acting superintendent) can continue with her mission to improve our schools academically.
Updated @ 2:48PM 9/24/07: The Journal Times is reporting retired Burlington administrator, Jackson Parker, is expected to be named interim superintendent. Mr. Parker has ties to RUSD which is good - an interim superintendent needs to jump right in and get things done. Having first-hand knowledge of the district will be a huge help.
It does appear that the board is closer to a decision in bringing some stability to the district since Dr. Hick's sudden departure 1 month ago. Tonight at 7:00PM is the regularly scheduled RUSD business meeting.By the action items on the agenda it does seem to indicate that the board is finally ready to publicly release possible choices for both interim superintendent and chief financial officer.
I imagine the recommendations will yield some very interesting and familiar names, simply because the situation at hand calls for candidates who are familiar with the trials and tribulations of the district.
Hopefully, the board can agree on the candidates chosen, so Dr. V (who is currently serving as acting superintendent) can continue with her mission to improve our schools academically.
Updated @ 2:48PM 9/24/07: The Journal Times is reporting retired Burlington administrator, Jackson Parker, is expected to be named interim superintendent. Mr. Parker has ties to RUSD which is good - an interim superintendent needs to jump right in and get things done. Having first-hand knowledge of the district will be a huge help.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
The wheels of government roll slowly - Part 3
Disclaimer: The comments below are my own feelings and interpretations - you may not agree with them. If you choose to comment, please be courteous and remember there are 2 sides to every story.
The way I see it is this - the RUSD board (and district as a whole) is at a crossroads right now. The steps that will be taken, or not taken, in the very immediate future will determine the district's path for many years to come.
Quite frankly, the public does not have a favorable view of the district - operationally speaking that is. Regardless of the very positive academic changes happening at this very minute in some of our schools, what happens at Central Office does not stay in Central Office. Central Office, like it or not, is not a vacuum.
The dysfunction of having outside consultants managing RUSD employees does not bode well for any RUSD stakeholder. The dysfunction of the board does not bode well either. Every board member needs to take the initiative and do their own part to save this district - don't wait to be asked. Just do it!
The only way for many to speak their mind is by voting, and that they are sure to do. I want everyone to understand that if decisions are not made quickly, the public is certain to lose faith in our schools. What will happen the next time a much needed referendum is on the table?
Do you really think that Racine has that short of a memory? Some very important decisions need to made quickly - I realize this mess is complicated and cannot be fixed in a short amount of time - but please start doing something!
Last night's meeting was a perfect example - 2 hours and nothing NEW was accomplished. I am grateful that the board has formalized its priorities, but nothing new or substantive was added to the already completed list of priorities. It's time to stop talking, the Racine schools need some action.
The way I see it is this - the RUSD board (and district as a whole) is at a crossroads right now. The steps that will be taken, or not taken, in the very immediate future will determine the district's path for many years to come.
Quite frankly, the public does not have a favorable view of the district - operationally speaking that is. Regardless of the very positive academic changes happening at this very minute in some of our schools, what happens at Central Office does not stay in Central Office. Central Office, like it or not, is not a vacuum.
The dysfunction of having outside consultants managing RUSD employees does not bode well for any RUSD stakeholder. The dysfunction of the board does not bode well either. Every board member needs to take the initiative and do their own part to save this district - don't wait to be asked. Just do it!
The only way for many to speak their mind is by voting, and that they are sure to do. I want everyone to understand that if decisions are not made quickly, the public is certain to lose faith in our schools. What will happen the next time a much needed referendum is on the table?
Do you really think that Racine has that short of a memory? Some very important decisions need to made quickly - I realize this mess is complicated and cannot be fixed in a short amount of time - but please start doing something!
Last night's meeting was a perfect example - 2 hours and nothing NEW was accomplished. I am grateful that the board has formalized its priorities, but nothing new or substantive was added to the already completed list of priorities. It's time to stop talking, the Racine schools need some action.
The wheels of government roll slowly - Part 2
I reported yesterday that I had expected the board to announce a candidate for interim superintendent last night - the board had even revised the agenda to accommodate this action.
But surprise! There wasn't any action on that item - in fact, the chair of the Search Committee (Kutz) did not have ANYTHING to report at all.
Have to admit, I wasn't surprised but I was disappointed, especially since I keep hearing from many of the board members how we have to "move on". How exactly can they do they if they just keep spinning their wheels?
But surprise! There wasn't any action on that item - in fact, the chair of the Search Committee (Kutz) did not have ANYTHING to report at all.
Have to admit, I wasn't surprised but I was disappointed, especially since I keep hearing from many of the board members how we have to "move on". How exactly can they do they if they just keep spinning their wheels?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
