School Board Votes On Pool Upgrade
I disagree with this decision.
The West Bend School Board approved a plan to modify the high school pool on Monday.
The pool, which is more than 30 years old, is an annual expense of $85,000. Upgrading heating and lighting technologies would reduce this expenses, according to Director of Facilities Dave Ross.
The board’s action enables Ross to capitalize on about $40,000 in grant funding he has already secured to augment the pool’s natural gas heating with solar energy and gives a green light to a community group to start fundraising to make up the difference.
[...]
Board members showed their support for the improvements in a 5-0 vote. Excused from the meeting were president Joe Carlson and Todd Miller.
“I can fully support it — if I know the money is going to be there,” Kris Beaver said. “We can advance the (request) but not start work until the money is there.”
The first pool project the district will take on is the installation of solar panels, Ross said. The total cost is estimated to be $70,000. The payback for the project is estimated at less than two years.
Dommisse and Smale are confident they can secure funding.
“The district would only commit to the HVAC,” said Board vice president Tim Stepanski. “That would need to be done anyway.”
According to Ross, the air handling unit would need to be replaced in the next five to 10 years regardless of the pool’s status.
I understand where the board members are coming from here… they are basically saying that they would have to do the maintenance projects anyway, so they vote for the spending on the maintenance and will bump the decision on the pool down the road in order to give people time to raise private funds for the pool upgrade. The problem with that is that the district is facing a budget “crisis” NOW and the pool will continue to cost $7,085/month to operate as long as it’s open.
Somebody wake me when we have a real budget crisis.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 0823 hrs
What budget crisis? Were getting a fitness center a new pool. There is no budget crisis that is just the show at tax time to TAX TO THE MAX.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 0935 hrs
Since the pool upgrade is controversial, will this philosophical debate extend to the high school football field? The West Bend Education Association donated to this cause:
The mission: “Our mission is to raise enough donated funds to replace the existing field. “Operation Turf” will be accomplished without a single district tax dollar going towards the cost of the turf field. “Operation Turf” will also create substantial savings in field maintenance costs” (http://wbgridiron.com/mission.html).
The sponsors: http://wbgridiron.com/sponsors.html
When it’s understood who are the people behind Operation Turf, will arguments against not be raised?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1020 hrs
So, let me understand. You said you that this should not be supported unless the money was in hand. We said that would be the case. You are not happy. Really?
Additionally, the district will spend the money on upkeep and running of the pool so that literally thousands of people can use it and you still find this to be unacceptable.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1033 hrs
4.So, let me understand. You said you that this should not be supported unless the money was in hand. We said that would be the case. You are not happy. Really?
It’s a matter of timing, Kris. If the money was in hand NOW, then fine. Go ahead. But in this case the board has decided to keep the pool open at a cost of roughly $85k/year until they can raise the money. I didn’t see any note of how long this state of being would last, but another board member mentioned 3-5 years. At 5 years, that’s $425k down the drain (pardon the pun).
If they don’t have the money by the time the levy is set, close the pool. Or close it until they come up with the money to open again. Again, it’s hard to take the protestation of fiscal crisis seriously when we’re spending $1,600 a week on operating a pool.
Posted by Owen on July 20, 2010 at 1043 hrs
Additionally, the district will spend the money on upkeep and running of the pool so that literally thousands of people can use it and you still find this to be unacceptable.
Forgot your second paragraph…
Yes, I do. A pool is a luxury. Plain and simple. Many schools don’t have them and do great. As for the Park and Rec, etc. using the pool, so what? The school district is supposed to be educating kids - not providing pool services to the community.
Posted by Owen on July 20, 2010 at 1046 hrs
If everyone and there brother not to mention county agencies are using the facilities why not charge them a fee. Why should the district pick up any costs not related to education, yes its great you share with everyone but your purpose is to educate, the monies budgeted to you are for only that purpose.
I have no beef with any of the childrens organized groups using the facilities even if it dont pertain to school activities, but somewhere , sometime a line needs to be drawn and usage fees put in place.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1121 hrs
“Educating kids” is controversial in and of itself. What are schools supposed to be doing? One sentence does not do the topic justice.
*Acquisition of information about the past and present: includes traditional disciplines such as literature, history, science, mathematics
*Formation of healthy social and/or formal relationships among and between students, teachers, others
*Capacity/ability to evaluate information and to predict future outcomes (decision-making)
*Capacity/ability to seek out alternative solutions and evaluate them (problem solving)
*Development of mental and physical skills: motor, thinking, communication, social, aesthetic
*Knowledge of moral practices and ethical standards acceptable by society/culture
*Capacity/ability to recognize and evaluate different points of view
*Respect: giving and receiving recognition as human beings
*Indoctrination into the culture
*Capacity/ability to live a fulfilling life
*Capacity/ability to earn a living: career education
*Sense of well-being: mental and physical health
*Capacity/ability to be a good citizen
*Capacity/ability to think creatively
*Cultural appreciation: art, music, humanities
*Understanding of human relations and motivations
*Acquisition/clarification of values related to the physical environment
*Acquisition/clarification of personal values
*Self-realization/self-reflection: awareness of one’s abilities and goals
*Self-esteem/self-efficacy
*provide a safe, supportive, healthy, learning environment (my addition).
(http://www.teachersmind.com/education.htm)If schools are simply supposed to educate, any school, private or public, can tremendously reduce fiscal costs. If a well used pool is a luxury, it would be hypocritical to overlook other luxuries, regardless of the maintenance costs. On the same note, tossing out expensive past investments (i.e. the pool) without weighing the social impact and potential life preservers is irresponsible. Frankly, I am impressed with the vocal and financial community support for the pool (and other luxuries) .
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1136 hrs
I forgot to mention that this Spring 2010, the school district had people walk through the high school building with drafting plans, laser measuring devices, and other tools of the trade to update the floor plans. Kris might confirm that these plans will be used to re-evaluate the high school building’s current classroom space allocations and allow sound discussion and planning of alternative means to redesign the current classroom designs to address overcrowding concerns. Considering what I have seen the building and grounds crew do in the HS libraries, removing, moving, and or building new classroom walls/doors can be done quickly and at reasonable cost. The only major problem I foresee is working with the ventilation system in the second floor: There is no ductwork, it’s just one massive vacuum. Many of the second floor’s current walls were installed after the HS building’s open concept design failed due to classroom noise issues. The later installed walls only go up to the ceiling, not to the roof, so as not to compromise the air circulation system; thus, noise between classrooms can still be an issue.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1204 hrs
JP
Guess I am confused.
Your saying in order to install a stand alone system to service the pool, another seperate system including ductwork must also be constructed in order to service the second floor? Are these issues tied together or were you just commenting on a seperate issue.
Please explain.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1259 hrs
#7
Go ahead. But at least have the courage and backbone to put your real name on the blog and call me and say what your intentions are. Stop hiding behind a fake name. You are a coward.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1302 hrs
Board members showed their support for the improvements in a 5-0 vote. Excused from the meeting were president Joe Carlson and Todd Miller.
Gee, it looks like the two new “common sense” board members supported the improvements. Must be a good idea.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1311 hrs
I would not support a recall of Kris. I disagree with him, but he has not to my knowledge done anything unethical or illegal. Save it for the election.
Posted by Owen on July 20, 2010 at 1311 hrs
Sorry, Crusher,
The pool’s ventilation issue is separate from the the HS building’s ventilation issue. The pool’s ventilation issue is the equipment (not the ductwork) that was originally installed: It was not designed to handle the corrosive effects of chlorine. Replacement is costly, but it can be delayed.
The HS building’s ventilation issue: The second floor has little ductwork in between the classroom ceilings and the roof: It a completely open system - a giant vacuum. The later installed classroom walls (not the bearing walls) end at the classroom ceilings. Excessive classroom noise goes up, through the ceiling, bounces off the roof layer, and heads back down to nearby classrooms. It’s not a major issue, but an annoyance.
Modifying/creating classroom walls affects the effectiveness of the 2nd floor ventilation system: To what extent is beyond me.The HS floor plan measurements that occurred in Spring 2010 are a separate issue that (I believe) will be brought forward to the board on Monday, July 26 at the ESC from 5:00 - 8:00, the date of the presentation of the instructional facilities plan. I am assuming in light of the fiscal situation, current public sentiment towards referendums, and the projected K-8 student numbers moving towards the high school, modifications of the current HS floor plans will be proposed for discussion: 1) Here’s what we have. 2) Here’s what we anticipate needing. 3) What can/should we do? 4) When? 5) How much? Since the Nov 6, 2007, referendum, I have had ideas as to what ideas might be discussed, but I want to wait and see.
Again, on this separate topic, the HS floor plan measurements will also confirm if the building is structurally sound. The HS was at least partially built on a sand base. The footings and lateral bracing may have been inadequate (due to 1970 building codes?) and some sinking/shifting here and there may have occurred. The 2010 HS floor plan measurements will confirm if there is a significant issue today or years down the road. At this time, a marble will not roll by itself down some hallways; however, if something is wrong…
Monday, July 26 at the ESC from 5:00 - 8:00
Instructional facilities plan presentationPosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1337 hrs
A recall costs money, taxpayer money, I dont agree with Kris on many things but he did earn/win his position by legal ballot. I dont know what grounds there would be to stand on in terms of a recall. This is never a good idea.
Give him some credit he has enough conviction to openly debate the issues, many elected positions wont even let you speak unless the floor is open.
Sure we disagree but he is doing his job.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1338 hrs
I agree with Owen about a recall for the same reasons. Save recalls for people who behave unethically or illegally. They are not “do-overs” for morning-after regret.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1512 hrs
How many of the people crying about keeping the pool open are also for shutting down the GYMs, the FOOTBALL FIELD, etc. These are also “Nice to haves” but don’t have anything to do with education either. Don’t be hypocrites. If you want to get rid of the pool then let’s get rid of all athletics. I am sure THAT would go over really well. As long as the district is keeping athletic programs in place, it’s not fair to fund one over another. They are all financial drains.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1529 hrs
18.How many of the people crying about keeping the pool open are also for shutting down the GYMs, the FOOTBALL FIELD, etc. These are also ?Nice to haves? but don?t have anything to do with education either. Don?t be hypocrites. If you want to get rid of the pool then let?s get rid of all athletics.
A couple of people have made similar comments, so I suppose I should respond…
First off, yes, by all means, evaluate every “nice to have” and plan accordingly. I happen to live near one of the school’s baseball diamonds that is used maybe a dozen times a year. Is it worth maintaining it for that? Probably not.
But also consider that some sports venues have drastically different cost structures. Football generates revenue, for example. Baseball diamonds are a lot cheaper to maintain than a pool. Plus, there are literally hundreds of sports that the school district does not facilitate. There are always choices to make.
But in response to your overall point, yes… every “nice to have” should be evaluated. In a world of limited resources, we can’t have everything.
Posted by Owen on July 20, 2010 at 1551 hrs
JP
I dont buy any part of a marble test, just way to many variables involved , we end up with assumptions but no hard facts. West Bend is noted for sand every building in town sits on it, if we knocked over every building in town because of a marble test your tent would be right next to mine. Any floors that have no floor drains should be flat, some building specs allow for + or _ 1/4 ” tolerance in floor slab heights .Will the archituectural firm that is doing these tests also be involved in any type of design work in conjunction with these issues?
Minor movement or shrinkage and expansion of materials is common, nothing to alarmed about, if the school stood with no problem for forty years its not going to develop a structural problem overnight . You have seen old farmhouses with reaccuring plaster cracks, so we know there is movement, how many did you see that suddenly collapsed?
I dont understand how a building floorplan will give you any information other then the sizes of the rooms, they should be looking at the building elevation drawings if looking for changes in floor height.
Keep in mind all structures are not built exact as shown on plans, there will be modifications, at the completion all these changes must be noted on the documents these are called as built drawings and should be the final record. We are talking early seventies construction so its very doubtful many things were properly recorded, in those days beer was legal to have on site.
What I am saying is just because the dimensions/heights of the current structure/school do not match that of the old plans/blueprints does in no way mean anything is in danger or that there is a problem it could have been built that way since day one.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1645 hrs
Owen is correct and we have been having that discussion for about a year now. One of the options is full pay athletics. What opinion do people have about that idea?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1645 hrs
“Will the architectural firm that is doing these tests also be involved in any type of design work in conjunction with these issues?” I doubt it. I doubt it was even an architectural firm conducting the measurements. The district has the people and computer programs to make the minor modifications I am envisioning. I will probe July 26.
Your last post is impressive. I learned something. Gotta go.
Authentic tractor pull at the Wash Cty Fair Wednesday! No modifieds.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1840 hrs
Full Pay athletics would be a giant goldmine for the district. This would be a good addition to the programs because it would come from the people actually using the fields, equipment, gear, etc. People would say its unfair, but if your buddy across the row in the classroom isn’t doing it, why should he pay for it?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1843 hrs
I don’t have a problem with full pay for athletics…but I would have HIGH expectations then…
If I pay $1M+ for football(or baseball or gymanstics) I’d expect my kid to play more than 2 minutes a game and I would expect them to compete/win.
If I am not going to get that I would want a coach to kindly tell me that my kid won’t get the playing time so that I can make an educated decision, do i want to pay that kind of money KNOWING that I am not going to see him on the field…Most high level club sports make that very clear and I respect that…
And I would happily pay whether my kid was on a freshman team or varsity…playing and competing is what all levels of high school athletics should be about…I do feel that there needs to be something done for kids/families that do not have the means to pay tho and how is that going to be determined?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1933 hrs
What would the cost be for athletics? I agree with Samantha that there needs to be something (booster club?) to help good athletes whose families can’t afford it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2010 at 1952 hrs
Club sports fill that role now for the truly gifted athlete’s .In need cases, scholarships are provided and in the case of state or national ranked athlete’s, fee’s are often waived .
Off season play allows coach’s evaluation and it’s not uncommon for an offer for a scholarship to be made solely after seeing an athlete play at a club level.
The truly gifted are rarely missed and costs melt away quickly.
For everyone else- Fee’s range from $200 (the fee our girls club basketball team charges) to up to $2,000 for an elite Volleyball team .
many parents are on payment plans -even for our somewhat meager team fee
.Few clubs- other than ours- will waive fee’s 100% for the needy and when a club travels to a national tournament, parents are often paying $ back to a club month’s after the season is over
Last year we bought shoes for 13 of our players -who need but couldn"t afford new one"s .Those shoes also became their school shoes
Is there money in “for profit “sports ?
No -if you charge $200/player , you lose $12K as we did last year in a 1st year start up+ we we did do so willingly.
Yes- if you charge $2,000 per player
I’m on record as saying that one school:
-would save $400K and up to $750K if administration were cut ( a common occurreence in a business merger ) as the schools merged-that is ANNUALLY after a 1 time uniform charge of less than $80k.
The districts uses primarily generic forms so the often discussed letter head “paper” costs of a conversion is minimal and is something I would gladly write a check for
(I would take $60 K/year of the savings and use it for a 6-12 intramural program at middle scho0ls and the HS.Our kids Physical fitness scores drop like a rock in 6th grade and we have zero intramurrals in the entire district.
- would eliminate paying for a slot on the bench that is unfilled in all sports except Volleyball and baseball
(the gridiron club would provide uniforms for all football players who showed up)That cost is $6K / athlete. In other words, to have the person who would not make a combined school team (volleyball and baseball)our costs are double for that student .
Participation has a price and it’s $6K per student per year.
If it was such a good idea in the early 70’s- why has no other school in the united States duplicated our “Great experiment “?For that student who loves to play but doesn"t make the team- we have a no cost intramural program for them.
_ would forestall when high schools will go 100% pay to play or drop athletics completely - false options I beiieve
The 100% pay to play team will be composed composed of the children of doctors and lawyers and dentist’s (and IT guys) (last one a joke, I think)
The options for the district is not 100% pay to play.
Limited fee’s- (and we are already at the top of what parents/kids can afford) and reduced athletics costs for the district are a Third way out of the crisis all schools face.
The other option is to eliminate athletics and save 1/60th of the budget.
If you’re a fiscal conservative (as are most of the folks in west bend , I assume you believe in eliminating duplicative costs, anticipating future concerns and competition.
Maybe this is my Nixon goes to China Movement.
“and the left leaning ,but stable one shall lead them”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 21, 2010 at 1442 hrs
I’m with you Mark…I am all for the 1 school option, always will be…
To those that think $2k is too much…food for thought…the YMCA (a NON PROFIT i might add) has a competitive gymnastics program costs $88 month for 2 week practices, additional $7 week for a 3rd optional practice…that equates to $1420…this does not include costs for uniforms, meet fees, gymnastics association fees and any travel…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 22, 2010 at 2214 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: 107
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 03:01 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).