School Board Candidate Forum
I attended a forum hosted by Glacier Hills Credit Union with the candidates for the West Bend School Board. In attendance were Dave Weigand, Doug Rakowski, Doug Ziegler, Kathy Van Eerden, Lynn Corazzi, Randy Marquardt
The forum will air a couple of times before the election (I don’t remember when or where), so I’ll leave the play by play for your own evaluation. Here’s what I took away from it - in no particular order:
- I really like Doug Ziegler. It’s still pretty clear that he hasn’t dug into the district’s current issues, but he’s a solid conservative and a good guy. I wish I had the opportunity to just sit and learn from him.
- Speaking of Ziegler, he made the comment that when he was on the board in the late 60’s, they also faced a capacity issue. West Bend was growing and they topped 7,000 students. Hmmmm… we’re back to slightly above that level with the same infrastructure and it’s now a “crisis.” Ziegler also commented how enrollment peaked, but then declined. Good insight.
- Dave Wiegand did great. He was articulate and challenged the status quo.
- Randy Marquardt also did great. He’s not the most articulate of men in a public setting, but his answers were thoughtful and on point.
- Lynn Corazzi was the biggest surprise for me. I spoke to him personally and found him very likable, but he came across as a total dick during the forum. He was condescending, dismissive, and outright misrepresented the positions of other candidates. It was disappointing for me because I like the guy.
- Doug Rakowski did well. He was the only candidate I didn’t have the opportunity to interview. He was clear of thought and purpose.
- Kathy Van Eerden seemed defensive. In many of her responses she was pointedly refuting points made by other candidates on the same question and even turned to them when she was making her points. Given that she’s running for her fourth term, her record speaks for itself.
Unfortunately, I didn’t have the opportunity to stick around and speak with the candidates, but I’m sure others did. It’s nice to have opportunities to hear the candidates in public.
UPDATE: Ginny has some video if you’d like to see for yourself.
I thought all the candidates did OK. Each offered something I could agree with.
Clearly there was some defensiveness by incumbents.
I still think Doug has the expertise and knowledge to not only have a point of view, but to also convince. He is our best shot to make the education dollar go the farthest. I like that he never offers an uninformed opinion.
I also thought Dave was very smooth and seemed like the kind of guy with whom you could have an honest disagreement without excessive vitriol. That’s a good thing.Posted by Charlie Hillman on February 10, 2010 at 2237 hrs
I’ll be posting video shortly.
Agree with all above statements. Incumbents were the most disappointing. Countenance was defensive. Answers were less than professional at times, taking personal jabs at others and some arrogant posturing going on. Four new candidates all showed themselves respectful and above reproach.
Questions were fair and balanced. Well-run forum.
Overall good job on GHCU part.
Posted by GAMazy on February 10, 2010 at 2318 hrs
I wasn’t there. Did the creationism issue come up, and if it did, what was said about it?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 10, 2010 at 2319 hrs
Creationism didn’t come up.
Posted by Owen on February 10, 2010 at 2322 hrs
Is there any truth to the rumor going around the Bend at the moment that Ginny was fired from her hospital job because she was allegedly illegally looking up medical records of people who opposed her in the whole library fiasco? I assume this is not true, right Ginny?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 10, 2010 at 2330 hrs
CT,
Did you start the rumor that you asked here that had nothing at all to do with the discussion? No class at all. No class at all.
Owen,
Thanks for the report.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 0807 hrs
CT,
Do you have an opinion about any of the candidates ?
I watched it from home, I thought everyone speaking had something to offer. Doug Z. stood out, I think that man has a wealth of information and insight that could benefit the district and in turn the taxpayers.
His knowledge would be such a tool to anyone in business, I would pay good money to here the man lecture.Talk about a seasoned quarterback walking in and saying here I am put me to work.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 0920 hrs
While I’m sure Ziegler has quite a bit of perspective and valuable insights, I would like to see data backing up the statement about the student enrollment being the same in the 60’s at 7000 as it is now. That is difficult to believe, since the population of West Bend in 1970 was about 1/2 what it is now and Jackson had only about 500-600 total population in 1970.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 0951 hrs
WBMomof4 -
I can’t find numbers back to the ‘60s, but in 1980, the end of baby boom kids going through school, the district enrollment had dropped to 6,537 and was down to 5,570 in ‘88-‘89 as family sizes decreased. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if they were around 7,000 in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 1024 hrs
What a shock owen has publicly stated that he would not support the incumbents and now says that they are the only ones who did not do well in the forum.
The only thing less suprising is the fawning that Ginny does over anyone not on the board. “above reproach” Really? that puts a huge amount of faith in people that you barely know.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 1047 hrs
If it bothers you so much, anon, move along. There’s no need for you to keep coming here.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 1054 hrs
What there’s no room for disagreement at B&S?
I just went and watched the candidate answers on the other blog. You know the one that doesn’t publish comments of people that disagree. Anyway, It is clear that Dave Wiegand has no idea what he is talking about. Lots of speculation and conjecture. If he had actually gone to some of the planning meetings or pre referendum informational meetings all of the points he made about overcrowding would have been answered. He and his wife have a pattern of not wanting to hear information they don’t like to hear. It ws that way during the harassment policy thing and it continues now.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 1059 hrs
Sock puppets?
Anon = coward
:zpopcorn:
Let’s be mature and stick to the topic of the post.
One’s opinion is just that.
Posted by GAMazy on February 11, 2010 at 1102 hrs
ginny answer the question. “above reproach?” really? In past comments you have said that you haven’t spoken to these people more than once or twice. do you know them well enough to say they act above reproach?
In addition, if one’s opinion is just that. then why do you feel the need to foist yours upon the entire community?Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 1108 hrs
Coward: Read the statement. It refers to the event last night only. Your hate-mongering is boring and old.
Posted by GAMazy on February 11, 2010 at 1118 hrs
I lack the character not to say ” i told you so” about Doug Z”
Incumbents always have the tougher job especially in a terrible economic and funding environment-and there is certainly a bias about the actions of the school board by most of the participants on this one.
Colorful analysis of mr Corazzi -Owen
sounds like the Fab 4 are offering us (yikes)
Hope and Change
MHM
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 1329 hrs
Most folks on this blog know that I support Ziegler.
I suppose I should disclose that he is one of my angel investors. I bring that up not only to be forthright, but also to relate my experience in getting him to invest.
If you want something from Doug, you had better have your act together. He asks very pointed and pertinent questions. There is no way to fool this guy, particularly if finance is involved. I will guarantee that if he is elected, he will know more about the District finances in six months than anyone else in town and that includes the administration.Posted by Charlie Hillman on February 11, 2010 at 1435 hrs
Not that anyone cares, I intend to vote for Randy for sure and probably Ziegler.
I know Randy a bit, and in every conversation I’ve had with him, he was thoughtful about different sides to issues. He is also very calm and rational. He’s a really good guy who can make a positive contribution to the board.
We don’t need hellraisers on the board, we just need people who will represent the taxpayers who are willing to make tough decisions out in the open.
It’s a flipping school board. There shouldn’t be so much drama.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 1508 hrs
My house will be sold before the board enacts the next levy and the three years of school program cuts begin. My children are going to a Hartland ($15 per 1,000 school tax levy) a better community and comparable taxes to WB. The board has a backbone.
Taxpayers first! Yea, Enjoy your school tax cuts now and fat family home sales and starts in 3 yrs. All that tightwad fiscal school managment and low school taxes (not city) making wb thrive since ‘93. ya’ all are gonna be a mcmansion trailerpark with barred up windows. come retirement, Don’t bet on your property values here.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 1632 hrs
One note about the self professed “conservative” candidate’s that perplexes me.
Randy M’s campaign lit says we should avoid unifying the high schools because there isn’t enough savings
It’s know that i am the most visible proponent of one school .I proposed a $300K savings plan that would have re-allocated $100 K to the sad excuse we have for a middle school and high school Intramural program.
Let’s assume you take the whole $400k savings (and ignore the problems in the Middle school’s ) in Athletics that we know is there and find another $300 k in duplicative administatration- not teachers or aides ( a distinct possibility)
That would be roughly $7 Million in savings over 10 years.
When I hear “conservatives” talk about making tough decisions and yet passing on the one school option- I’m pretty sure they"re as political as the folks on the board already .
Political as in” whew,that’s a hard one-may I respectfully pass and say it needs further study-a commission perhaps? “
I understand my squishy fellow progressive friends having trouble making this call- but you guys are the champions of the taxpayers pocketbook.
Man up!!!!
One school will be unpopular - but it’s the bold, smart and right thing to do first- and there isn"t an easy second choice .
We save $7MM and no academic programming is cut
I know of one candidate who is on the record for one school and who- like I - can read a balance sheet with the best of them
He get one of my votes
MHM
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 1652 hrs
We don’t need hellraisers on the board, we just need people who will represent the taxpayers who are willing to make tough decisions out in the open.
It’s a flipping school board. There shouldn’t be so much drama.
As Wendy said last week don’t buy any green bananas. I agree with what she said 100%. We need people on the board that will be responsible and not create drama.
Mark,
if you and others had listened to my comments at the work session when we decided not to put the schools together this year you would have heard me state my reason very concisely. It was this. I have been through mergers in business and everything I was hearing from Cassandra and the other administrators was telling me that we needed more of a plan as to how we would go together. She was saying just make the decision and we will make it work. I have heard that in business enough times to know that it will not work well. we have a group that is putting together the time table for putting the schools together in the event that we decide to go that direction. No decision has been made.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 1817 hrs
Just wondering, who is a hellraiser, and where has this been demonstrated?
Green bananas, Kris? Are you saying that incumbents are the only way to go then?
Posted by GAMazy on February 11, 2010 at 1907 hrs
green bananas is a reference to a tongue in cheek saying that means the world is coming to an end, because Wendy and I agree on something. She used it a week or so ago.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 1945 hrs
Year / student pop.
1980 6,537
‘88-‘89 5,570
‘65-‘70 7,000 (est)
11/09 7100Ziegler (emanating waves of solid conservative vibrations that trounce mention of Wiegand’s, Marquardt’s, and Rakowski’s conservative auras (Owen detects supernatural vibrations of conservatism?)) was on the school boards that led to the referendums for the then new high school. If during ‘65-‘69 the district was doing fine without the new twin HS, and we only have 7,100 students now, the School District stole $6.2 million from the taxpayers in 1970 building the twin HS, and that excludes interest.
How could people watching out for us taxpaying sheep have missed this? Is Ziegler a covert-liberal disguised as a conservative? Will the fleecing ever end?
By the way, how many of the school board wanna-bes give the BS line they were bringing creativity to the budget debates (which translates to: “I don’t want to say anything definitive because I’m green, I just want the job, and I am not ready to turn away potential voters by saying something like a leader.”?
The budget c-c-c-c-cuts are in black and white for 3yrs folks - get creative with that. I equally dislike all candidates.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 2132 hrs
After watching last night’s discussion, what disturbed me the most was the seemed definition of a successful person as one with a college degree. Not everyone will choose that route - I didn’t and I don’t think that makes me unsuccessful. Yes our academic standards need to be high and we should drive each student to achieve success whatever that route is.
To those running, a bit of advice. In the past year I have learned that what I thought I knew, I didn’t. Yes, have principles and run on them and use them in every opportunity as you make decisions. Philisophical differences are a good thing. It causes debate in a proper forum, it sometimes causes heartburn, but it also causes a group to come to the best possible decision they can. I am thankful for all of the candidates running because it causes the discussion that started last year to stay in the public. It keeps us in check, another good thing.
One last bit of advice - if elected be prepared for a lot of hours!
Tim Stepanski
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 2222 hrs
“Students at the bottom of the social order tend to be “frozen” in their parents’ status, but for the small percentage who can rise above that status, the schools are the chief route to success” (Allan Ornstein & Francis Hunkins. Curriculum: Foundations, Principals, and Issues 170).
National % of students graduating high school/college
1900: 6.5 / 3.9
1950: 59 / 27
1960: 65 / 31
1970: 76 / 45
1980: 74 / 46
1990: 85 / 48
2000: 87 / 54
2010: 86 / 60Number of major U.S. curriculum philosophies: 8
Number of major U.S. curriculum theorists since 1918: 7+
Number of major U.S. learning theories and principals: 14+Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 11, 2010 at 2334 hrs
Kris, respectfully-
the one school issue issue was brought back by the board as a straw man -pure and simple.Better to have spiked the idea when the district leadership brought it back to you as it’s #1 cost savings . The board had no intention of moving forward on it and it is disingenuous of anyone to say it did .
I did not get one single followup question form the board on the proposal. Even a “you’re smokin’ crack pal ” comment” would have been appreciated by your humble servant.
You look at $300-400 K and yawned and said it wasn’t enough $
So also said the so called “fiscal conservatives” running for the school board .
Remind me never to hire ANY OF YOU to help me run either of my business’s
I get it- many on this blog board wouldn"t support the school board if you gave away free beer at meetings.
Choosing to merge the schools cuts your remaining base in half.
As a professional politician - - I’d do the same thing.
But all of those on the board - and those running- say they aren"t politicians.
This issue seperate’s the are’s and the aren’t sThe job is to cut- because you have to- the things that can “first do no harm”
As you know- I support this board in a prominent way in almost every endeavor save this one
In this case- the administrators said they could make it work- and actually said to do it sooner rather than later.But -you passed-and in this climate -that is noted and not understood.
As a businessman -you know that mergers find duplication -and eliminate it.
as soon as possible.rarely do companies say“we’re in real trouble- but if it’s only $300k- we’ll pass.”
” come back when you have some REAL cuts “
Mistakes could be made- but the process is swift -and adaptations are made when problems arise.
The cuts come first-and everyone gets on board or they’re toast - and miraculously even more places to cut appear- out of seemingly nowhereEverything is a slow walk with this board on this issue -with a mountain of hyperbole-and “lets have the staff discuss it and come back to us later- preferebly much , much later”
The staff did come to you and reccomended you proceed .
The board whiffed
we are past sentiment ( or having board member support 2 schools because their kid got to play- or play more under the format)
we are also past the bureaucratese that makes me want to pound my bald head on the table..
We respectfully disagree on this issue.
And for the record- I’m right and theboard is slowly,woefully wrong,
Mark Maley
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 12, 2010 at 0050 hrs
I get it- many on this blog board wouldn’t support the school board if you gave away free beer at meetings.
LOL! I believe you are woefully wrong about that, Mark.
Posted by GAMazy on February 12, 2010 at 0100 hrs
Back in the 70’s (keep in mind I wasn’t born yet) I think the school board made a bold decision to try the twin high schools. Glad to know we were trying to be a progressive city for once. One would hope that the theory behind twin high schools would catch on and spread. IT DIDN’T. Why hasn’t it caught on? Because it doesn’t work. It kills school spirit, pits neighbor vs neighbor…We are left with the fallout.
I am voting for Doug Ziegler…make that bold decision that’s been long over due. Unite our schools.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 12, 2010 at 0654 hrs
The staff did come to you and reccomended you proceed
Yes they did, but they had no plan for how it was going to work. As I said I have been through this and it was poorly done. I was not going to allow us to put the schools together without a plan. there is nothing disengenuous about that. that is how I feel and what I believe. I can’t speak for anyone else. So, in my case Mark you are wrong. I did not whiff.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 12, 2010 at 0715 hrs
Mr. Maley - or should I say - Your Holiness,
Yes, the administration brought it back to us. Yes, the teachers brought it back to us. What was their reasoning? Eventually it is going to happen so lets just get it done. Lets just rush in and make a decistion. Yes, in business you can make decisions on the fly and normally adjust to any ramifications. However, I submit that this wasn’t a “business decision”. Yes, you eloquently presented to the board your plan - and as I listened the only rationale I heard was “we need to be a sports powerhouse” and “do it for the pride of the community” and “I am tired of losing to this team or that team”. I am sorry that I didn’t allign with your visions of ticker tape parades for our victorious sports teams.
I draw my decision making from what was drilled into me in my 9 years in the army. When we finally crossed the Saudi border going into Iraq during Desert Storm- each member of my team new where we were going, when we were going, why we were going, and how we were going to get there. They also knew who would take over if I was killed or who picked up what role if another team member was taken out. My point in saying this - decisions we make on the board affect people, not just the bottom line. I campaigned as one who thought only of the bottom line and over the year learned we are in the people business and the “people” are kids. I will not make a decision based on the almighty dollar if we have no plan in place to ensure the impact to those we serve is minimal.
Mr. Maley, you said to remind you to never hire one of us to run one of your businesses . . . If that is how you run business . . . with all do respect to your committment to West Bend, please remind me to not apply for one of your positions.
Now that this is off my chest - lets have a cup of coffee and put together a plan that can move this forward.
Respectfully,
Tim Stepanski
West Bend School BoardPosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 12, 2010 at 0915 hrs
I think the 300k-400k figure was tossed out in haste. Why not slow down and take a good long look and crunch these numbers again. Elimination of positions may require some to carry a bigger load, but that is all the norm anywhere you turn these days.
Combining both these schools is long over due and if we can save a few bucks in the process now is the time.
Still hanging my hat on Doug Z.,I think he could hop on board and be up to speed in no time .
Closet liberal ? Oh please , did the easter bunny tell you that?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 12, 2010 at 0922 hrs
I was not going to allow us to put the schools together without a plan.
We seem to have a chicken and egg problem. Certainly nobody will put much effort into a plan until the Board makes the initial decision. And the Board, feeling under budget pressure has apparently adopted the strategy of considering nothing unless a 7-0 vote is certain. That is evident from the statement above which implies that Kris has a one man veto power.
the only rationale I heard was “we need to be a sports powerhouse”
I’ll give you another one Tim. If we don’t start saving money now on athletics, I am afraid that the Board will be forced to eliminate all sports in the near future. It has happened in many other school districts around the nation.
Combining both these schools is long overdue and if we can save a few bucks in the process now is the time.
Agree with Crusher - I think that there will be greater cost savings than just from athletics. It’s kind of funny how one number from some random committee gets taken as indisputable fact.
Posted by Charlie Hillman on February 12, 2010 at 1604 hrs
We seem to have a chicken and egg problem. Certainly nobody will put much effort into a plan until the Board makes the initial decision.
That is not the case here. we have people working on the possible transition right now.
I would not necessarily say that putting the schools together is long over due, but doing so will have positives. clearly it will also have negatives.
And the Board, feeling under budget pressure has apparently adopted the strategy of considering nothing unless a 7-0 vote is certain. That is evident from the statement above which implies that Kris has a one man veto power.
that is clearly not the case. I have said publicly that we will have to vote, in some cases, line by line because there are things that will not be supported by some. I said that in reference to the upcoming budget cuts. I still believe that to be true.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 12, 2010 at 1849 hrs
Randy M’s campaign lit says we should avoid unifying the high schools because there isn’t enough savings Umm, not exactly. It says before this is considered, we need a comprehensive analysis (i.e., one that doesn’t just say “same number of kids = same number of staff positions”). The recent plan was entirely athletics driven, and therefore ignored other potential savings.
I think crusher’s statement was right on target.
Randy M.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 12, 2010 at 2238 hrs
Respectfully
RandyM/wiaggie
Ignored is word that should be used coming for a fact based perspective.
Your’s isn’t!Tim-thanks for the new moniker ‘his Holiness”- i like it
and I gratefully accept your coffee invitaion. I still owe a coffee to my friend Smeetya footnote-my presentation in the printed form you read when i presented it is now winging to your home.
Every statement you made about it is verifiably untrue.
(please address your apology to this blog under Holiness - or just good Old mark )Kris- thanks for having one person veto power over the school board.
Please announce the “has to be 7-0 ” voting policy for budget actions to the public.
Sorry boys- You can sell this drivel to the unwashed.
But not to me
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 12, 2010 at 2354 hrs
Not to hijack a thread or anything… but since this one is regarding education. My new state of North Carolina’s Board of Education is/was trying to slip in a major curriculum change “under the radar”. One of the highlights? They would stop teaching any US History from pre 1877 in High School and focus on “Global Perspectives”. More information can be found here.
Two rather startling lesson plans from this new curriculum:
Formative Item:
Using three Supreme Court Cases (e.g., Brown v Board, Roe v Wade, Korematsu v US) as support explain how the US Supreme Court has upheld rights against oppressive government?and
Which of these was an international benefit of the Cuban Revolution of 1959?
A. Cuba and the Soviet Union establish diplomatic relations.
B. Cuba eventually nationalized all U.S. business, industry and commercial property.
C. Castro disassociated himself from prevailing “Communist ideas.”
D. Cuba’s export of health and education services to developing nations in Africa.Anyway - posting this here because we found out that it is also being proposed in 13 other states, including Wisconsin.
Tony Evers may be trying to pull the same fast one on you guys.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 13, 2010 at 1123 hrs
Tim-thanks for the new moniker ‘his Holiness”- i like it
I think Tim may have forgotten to put a certain three letter prefix to your new moniker.
clearly it will also have negatives.
There is one high school academically with one band, chorus, debate team, etc etc. Even many sport teams have had to merge due to lack of interest. So, I guess some high profile sports will be affected. I’d prefer that to dropping academic offerings. And, I like the 9-10, 11-12 split between buildings - that has some real advantages.
keep in mind I wasn’t born yet
So I have shoes older than Samantha, and yet she shows wisdom. Just FYI, the West Bend High class of 1969 had 425 graduating seniors. What is total for both sides now?
therefore ignored other potential savings.
Very true.
Posted by Charlie Hillman on February 13, 2010 at 1218 hrs
Your Holiness
,
The board does not just put out 7-0 votes. My first vote - April 27th for the purchase of land in Jackson 6 for, 1 against (me). The vote to move the land purchase forward near the high school 5 for 2 against (Bruce Koenig and Myself - and you should remember the bru-ha-ha that erupted rom that evening). Members of the board have asserted themselves, and have done so even more in committee meetings. Kris does not have sole veto power. He has his beliefs and can very eloquently speak his opinions. I will not speak for others on the board, but I support going to one school and spoke this in October- but not until someone gives me a plan that will show me how it will be done. I will not do it just for sports but will do it because financially I believe it the correct thing to do. Yes Charlie, I am aware of the savings and agree with them - however, just throwing out a number of $300,000 and not quantifying it and telling me exactly where that number came from won’t sway me. Those on the board and in the administration have learned over the past year that you don’t just throw a number at me and expect me to believe it. I want to know the facts behind it.Mark, I look forward to reading your plan again (you probably won’t remember but I actually came about 45 minutes late the night you were there so only caught the tail end) - I will apologize if need, and will purchase the coffee for you in homage.
p.s. I would like to withdraw my statement about reminding me to not apply for any of your jobs….. In this economy, who knows what could happen and one should never burn a bridge
Tim Stepanski
(262) 334-0775 home
(262) 243-3081 workPosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 13, 2010 at 1246 hrs
Man
I can just feel the love in this room.
Many good ideas out there glad at least Tim is willing to listen.
Charlie hang on to those shoes a little longer I hear next year high buckles will be in again.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 15, 2010 at 1428 hrs
Charlie,
about 650 students
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 15, 2010 at 1523 hrs
about 650 students
Really? I seem to remember closer to 500 total graduating seniors. Do you have a source? I also remember that almost all of our growth has been at the elementary level.
Charlie hang on to those shoes a little longer I hear next year high buckles will be in again.
Yes, that’s me - a real fashionista. Somewhere my daughters are laughing and they don’t know why. I still have wingtips that I got from my father-in-law when he passed.
Posted by Charlie Hillman on February 15, 2010 at 1727 hrs
Total Entries: 20000
Total Comments: 134057
Most Recent Entry: 05/25/2012 06:26 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 02:38 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 95
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 02:56 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).