Money Found for Fitness Center
Joe Carlson, School Board president, I have a question for you. A couple of years ago before I agreed to work on the referendum we spoke about the fitness center. You assured me that in no way would the district financially support it. You told me there was the grant for equipment and that the St. Joe’s Foundation was contributing $250,000 and that the athletic department was soliciting donations to make up the balance of what was needed to build this center.
What happened? How could a district that had to raise the tax levy to the maximum allowed in order to reduce programming cuts, a district that is anticipating another $2 million reduction in state aid next year, a district that discusses an operational referendum in order to operate, a district that is considering combining the twin high schools in order to save money, how could that district give $100,000 to the fitness center?
I would be very interested to know what changed in the last couple of years from when you told me the district would not financially support this center to today, to giving the center $100,000. That’s not exactly pocket change, Mr. Carlson.
You told me something two years ago that makes me wonder if it was true back then or were you planning all along to support the center in order not to lose the grant?
Nancy Leach West Bend
You told me something two years ago that makes me wonder if it was true back then or were you planning all along to support the center in order not to lose the grant?
Cuz its always best to assume the worst in people. Thanks!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 0804 hrs
Should a school district/business cut all improvement expenses (buildings, customer service, assembly line, etc.) during challenging times?
Is the district “restructuring” to come up with 100K?
Frankly, I missed the board meeting(s) that addressed this topic (like Ms. Leach).
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 0824 hrs
Hey its fun to spend other peoples money. Tax to the max we want more stuff.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 0828 hrs
Dadnabit, doesn’t anyone read the memos? It said we’re going to tax our way out of this “recession”, and by cracky that’s exactly what they’re going to do. Otherwise the alternative is to allow for new businesses and jobs that would provide taxes, but that would be contrary to contemporary mores that call for increased Government dependency.
This is what happens when people have those pesky good memories, Mr. Carlson. They tend to expect you to keep to your word.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 0917 hrs
Hey its fun to spend other peoples money
Do you have public utilities at your house, or benefit from a paved road, fire/police protection? If so, then stop using services provided by “other peoples [sic] money”.
Dumbass.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 0933 hrs
Ahhhhh Nancy,
Welcome to the Joe and Pat’s magic show!
Nothing changes till this board does.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 0953 hrs
I’d be looking for a little more specifics about the $100,00 expenditure - maybe a school board member could clarify?
According to the district website, the $100,00 expenditure was for the purpose of making the entrance “safe & secure”. As I recall from previous referendum discussions, “safe & secure entrances” was identified as a priority for all facilities.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 1020 hrs
Joe Carlson is responsible for creating and maintaining many private sector jobs. How about you guys? Or Nancy?
This seems like a real good deal for the District.Posted by Charlie Hillman on July 14, 2010 at 1149 hrs
Joe is also responsible for the layoff of many good teachers.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 1212 hrs
How come nobody is blaming Bush?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 1252 hrs
Sad how libs like George can’t differentiate a Fitness Center from public utilities, paved roads or fire/police protection.
George, ya gotta stop sniffing that ethanol!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 1413 hrs
I guess if you can’t defend the expenditure, praise the individual!
-Nothing changes till this Board does.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 1454 hrs
Charlie: Who then will be responsible for paying utilities? maintenance? eventual upgrades of equipment? staff? St. Joe’s? WBSD? Taxpayers?
This goes beyond a nice building with wonderful equipment for the “community” to use.
-Nothing changes ‘til this board does.
Posted by GAMazy on July 14, 2010 at 1459 hrs
Who then will be responsible for paying utilities?
Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth. Many on this blog urged business to step up and pay for some extras. They have and still you’re not happy?
I suppose if someone gave me a toaster for a wedding present, I could demand they pay for the electricity but that would be rude and silly.
As to the board changing, it already has. Joe does not have dictatorial powers. I noticed that Randy was there to accept the check. Has he turned to the dark side?Posted by Charlie Hillman on July 14, 2010 at 1658 hrs
Charlie: That was a done deal before Randy was ever on the board. What could he do? Your reasoning is not valid in this case. It’s nice to have the gift horse, but if it means that for the duration of ownership the taxpayers are stuck feeding and watering it, well then…. Considering our financial constraints at the moment, don’t you think it’s a bit much to expect excitement and acceptance of yet another condiment on the district platter?
Posted by GAMazy on July 14, 2010 at 1719 hrs
Charlie, just curious where do (did we) we find another 100k?
As to the board changing, it already has. Joe does not have dictatorial powers. There will be more change to come, bet on it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 1903 hrs
It was a done deal before Randy was on board. Well, what does Randy think NOW that he is on board? Mum’s the word. Dave W. is the only one who has stood his ground on anything and has been the single “No” vote when push comes to shove. I haven’t heard Randy speaking up about this *outrageous* misuse of deferred maintenance money or anything else for that matter. What gives? Tim Stepanski syndrome? Or maybe… just maybe, he thinks it wasn’t a BAD idea! ::faint::
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 14, 2010 at 2153 hrs
The deal was done the same as with the fieldhouse .
Funds were donated from outside parties and the district only paid for
the parts of the project that dealt with the secure entrances (PE building) or removal of the 30 year old floor (fieldhouse)This isn"t a crystal tea set (or toaster)that no one can use nor does it impose onerous long term costs to the district
It’s a part of the largest classroom in the district (the PE area’s at the HS ),with the equipment part of a grant .
The Building will available to the community in off school hours.
The physical fitness of our youth drops off the chart in 6th grade and we have mediocre Middle school sports programs and zero intramurals for our kids
THis is a 80% privately funded, 1st step to remedy these concerns about our childrens
fitness levelsRather than see evil where this is none, please call me if you have questions .
The conjecture i read above is 100% incorrect-there’s no smoke or fire-just something that straightforwardly helps our students .
It’s an excellant example of the community working with the district to solve issues of decaying facilities with private funds .The reason it was supported by the board is that it made sense
Again Call me if your have any questions whatsoever with regard to this matter
Mark Maley
West Bend Public Schools Foundation President
334-2167Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 15, 2010 at 0048 hrs
@Mark: Yawn.
Posted by GAMazy on July 15, 2010 at 0552 hrs
Reminds me of 1917 when West Bend representatives asked for $15,000 for a library land purchase from the Carnegie foundation, $5K over Carnegie’s $10K offer. They wanted everything without giving anything and got nothing.
$10,000 = $170,451.56 in 2010 dollars.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 15, 2010 at 0702 hrs
Great response, Ginny! You sure told him. Way to engage in intelligent discourse!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 15, 2010 at 0744 hrs
Great response, Ginny! You sure told him. Way to engage in intelligent discourse!
Same to you, George. Same to you.
I have to agree with Mark on this one. A hefty donation for a worthy extra that West bend could not otherwise afford. The maintenance costs are a cheap price to pay.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 15, 2010 at 0807 hrs
I don’t know Tuerqas. I have to side with George and his comment on this one. Mark Maley took the time to walk the board through the details and leave a phone number only to receive the response of “Yawn”??? This exemplifies one of the major problems I have with this board. Opposing political view points are usually met with scorn and derision. This fuels a retort which is further condemned by others, IGNORING the immaturity of the initial post igniting the initial retort. (WTF? I hope you can follow my reasoning; it sounds suspect even to me.)
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 15, 2010 at 0908 hrs
Defenders of Magic Joe, (Hey look I found $100,000.00 but we’re still 2 million short!)
Sense Charlie won’t answer and Mark danced around it, what orifice do we pull another 100k from?
Or maybe one of our Board members would like to chime in.
helloooooooo….......Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 15, 2010 at 0941 hrs
Charlie, just curious where do (did we) we find another 100k?
I’m no longer in the trenches so can’t say for certain. I’m just sure that out of a $75 million budget, I could find a way to reallocate such a small amount.
Recall that the District budget must balance (no deficit spending allowed), so indeed, this $100k will need to come out of something else. But that’s OK .
Indeed, if we want to do more with less, it’s important that our Board is allowed to shake up the status quo and reallocate resources.
If I were still on the Board, it would be very hard to turn down such a generous donation. Great job, Mark, et.al. on the Foundation.
And, agree with laker – these are serious times requiring serious discussions – name calling not really helpful (but occasionally funny).Posted by Charlie Hillman on July 15, 2010 at 1340 hrs
Defenders of Magic Joe
I wonder if Joe could convince his wife to embrace this new moniker.
Try, try, try to understand…..Posted by Charlie Hillman on July 15, 2010 at 1344 hrs
Charlie, somehow I believe you would work the figures and balance the budget; however, you are not, as you say, “in the trenches.” Thus, the dilemma.
The public was scorned with an unwelcome referendum and a hefty tax increase. The timing is the problem with this “gift.” If we were in a fiscally advantageous situation, this would most likely be well received. Unfortunately, such is not the case and we are just dumping more fuel onto a bonfire.
Posted by GAMazy on July 15, 2010 at 1831 hrs
I got a great idea, what about stealing the money from pick & save like the last loser in charge of this money laundering joke of a public service. Wake up and smell the carpet west bend!!!!!!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 16, 2010 at 0013 hrs
The public was scorned with an unwelcome referendum and a hefty tax increase.
I’ll agree on the max tax - I would have tried to find a middle ground.
But, Badger really needed the update and the voters agreed - that’s the way it should work. I will continue to maintain that Jackson elementary also is worthy of a capital referendum.
I just wish we as a community could sit down and figure this out.smell the carpet
Not while I’m having my coffee.
Posted by Charlie Hillman on July 16, 2010 at 0909 hrs
I haven’t heard Randy speaking up about this *outrageous* misuse of deferred maintenance money or anything else for that matter. Well, here is my two cents:
This project has been under discussion in CFAC2 for almost two years. There was always going to be some district contribution, whether related to utilities or the entrance. It was CFAC2’s recommendation to go with a design-build contract since it is a simple structure; Dave Ross decided what costs were attributable to which part of the overall project. The District got some minor improvements, the Foundation got the Fitness Center shell.
The real point is the evaluation of the initial grant cost. While I was not involved at that time, I think if we look back, it came (as usual) with a lot of strings attached. I guess everyone has to decide on their own what the fitness equipment and center is worth to the community. But, this is a perfect example that “free” money is never free…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 16, 2010 at 1542 hrs
Randy is correct that there is no such thing as free money. this is a process that has been under way for over two years. In addition to that it allows the district to fulfill the requirements of the PEP grant that we received about two years ago. It is for that reason that I need to point out that this is not primarily a fitness center. It is a Physical Education classroom and will be used first and formost for that. It does have the added benefit of allowing for the community to come in to use it. I hope that many people do come in and take advantage of the facility.
If you go back to comment #18 Mark really addresses the issue very well.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 16, 2010 at 1624 hrs
GAMazy - I noticed on your blog post on this topic you’ve tagged it as a “hate crime”. WHAT?!?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 18, 2010 at 2211 hrs
LAKER:
I don’t know Tuerqas. I have to side with George and his comment on this one…
I’m just wondering how you can talk about immaturity and name calling etc., and still say you agree with George on something? I don’t think there is a person on this blog that pumps out more swear words and insults per word written than George in the past several months. Specifically, what were you agreeing with?
Cuz its always best to assume the worst in people. Thanks!
or
Dumbass
?
Two years ago the ‘timing’ was not so bad in that there was little recession talk. If Joe (I have no opinion, I do not know him at all) had said 2 years ago that the district would pay nothing (not even future maintenance) he was clearly politicking to get an athletic center.
My only point was that anyone with any sense had to know that a one-time grant was not going to pay for all future costs involved with this type of grant. That includes both Joe and every taxpayer in the West Bend district. Only call him a liar if you are willing to call yourself gullible.
The only question those same taxpayers have to answer now is, was it worth it. Is it worth having private donations pay for 60%+ for a new fitness center that will have the dual role of being a school asset and a community fitness center? Dishonesty from a politician aside(You expect honesty? Who are you trying to kid?), was that a worthwhile bargain 2 years ago before the housing bubble burst? I just think you are crying over a river of spilled milk and it is the people disagreeing with accepting the gift whose timing is poor.
2 years ago this was a great deal even if the politicians had told the truth that ‘unforeseen expenses’ would need to be picked up by other private sources or the district.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 19, 2010 at 0824 hrs
Mark Maley took the time to walk the board through the details and leave a phone number only to receive the response of “Yawn”???
Spot on, and not altogether surprising for GAMazy, or Owen with his trademark “huh” commentaries.
Discourse!!!!!! Yay!!!!!!!
(wait, what did Glen Beck just say…...DVR-rewind!)
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 19, 2010 at 1005 hrs
@ Tuerqas - Actually, it was THIS comment…
21.Great response, Ginny! You sure told him. Way to engage in intelligent discourse!
Posted by George on July 15, 2010 at 1344 hrs
I think you’re quite aware of the disdain and mockery that is directed towards posters with a different (more liberal) view point on this blog. While George is not a saint, he certainly isn’t the only poster involved in these exchanges. I, along with many others, are among the guilty as well.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1144 hrs
Total Entries: 19998
Total Comments: 134037
Most Recent Entry: 05/24/2012 05:43 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 12:32 am
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 81
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 04:02 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).