West Bend’s Coming School Referendum
Here’s the plan for West Bend’s school referendum. Let’s take a look:
To assess the District’s future land needs, a complete long-range facilities plan was hammered out that is estimated to cost $119.3 million. It includes new school buildings; two land purchases; and the expansions, renovations, repairs, and additions that are required at all District schools.
OK, that’s a helluva lot of money. But I must recognize that West Bend’s schools have been pretty well run and they deserve the benefit of the doubt. We are a growing district and new construction is inevitable.
In response to the criteria above, the Board as a whole agreed last night that they would consider the following comprehensive long-range facilities plan at its June 11 regular Board meeting:
Ø Close Barton; convert Silverbrook into a 600-student elementary school for the Barton students, as well as to alleviate enrollment pressure at Green Tree, McLane, and Fair Park elementary schools;
Ø Complete energy efficiency work at Silverbrook; Close Jackson Elementary School and build a new 650 student elementary school on a new site in the Village of Jackson;
Ø Close Badger Middle School;
Ø Build a two-story twin middle school complex, with two separate schools to maintain the house and small school climate, yet joined by a common space to sustain exploratory classes, advanced classes, and other special services;
Ø Renovate the high school entrances and libraries, provide classroom additions for enrollment growth in special education and regular education, and address technology connectivity;
Ø Address the Decorah Elementary School building conditions, including demolishing and replacing a wing of the building that is deteriorating;
Ø Address the maintenance and expansion needs at Decorah, Fair Park, Green Tree, and McLane including items such as fire protection, windows, roofs, plumbing, parking, ceilings, heating and ventilating, and items such as fire protection, windows, roofs, plumbing, parking, ceilings, heating and ventilating, and providing secure entrances at all schools.
OK… I am willing to extend the West Bend school district a lot of slack. First, they have been pretty open during the process - especially Charlie Hillman. Second, we ARE a growing district and construction costs that exceed revenue limits are to be expected. Third, they have a history of doing a pretty good job running the district in a fiscally responsible manner.
Also, I must note that the dollar amounts aren’t assigned to each one of these projects. And even if we did see those numbers, we don’t know what it actually pays for. For example, what are the design and materials considerations for new construction? Are they the most economical while being durable? All of that being said, I have some opinions (shocked?) at what I see.
I support the new construction, the closing of schools, the rebuilding of wings, etc. As long as these are done reasonably, it’s necessary and rightly falls outside of normal operating expenses. I also support the combined Middle Schools and such. The folks who put this together have done a thoughtful and economical job with those initiatives. I commend them for their efforts.
I do not support the new windows, security, parking, roofs, fire protection, ceilings, heating, etc. being built into this referendum. Those are normal maintenance items that should be planned for and built into the operating budget. The failure of the school board to plan for these very normal maintenance items in the operating budget is troubling. They should not be included in a referendum.
I encourage the school district planners to strip down the proposed referendum to the essentials associated with a growing district. They are unlikely to find support for normal maintenance items that they neglected.
Owen
I fear that you have been associating with the liberals way too much and as a result, you are getting soft.
I would fight the 1st referendum like all hell, defeat it and then make them come back with the back-up plan.
I don’t live in West Bend but everyone in Wisconsin pays more when these big spending referendums pass.
Maybe there is a clue in the word that I have to type in order to submit this comment. It’s “LESS”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 31, 2007 at 2354 hrs
I ask myself when I see these referendums, “How was New Berlin able to build a new school without having to raise taxes/put it to a referendum?” It can be done, but it is much easier to soak Joe Taxpayer.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 01, 2007 at 0617 hrs
Hey sleestak - thanks for teeing it up for me. Had we taxed at the New Berlin rate (10.89 vs 6.35 in West Bend), we wouldn’t need to go to referendum. We would have raised more than $120 million extra in just THE LAST SIX YEARS. Had that happened, however, I fear the money would not have been spent on buildings, but on something stupid. New Berlin has been soaking the taxpayer for years. At least we have the courage to ask the taxpayer whether they feel this is worth the investment. And Orv, my children would get a good laugh at the notion that I am in any way a liberal. I hope that you agree there are some things worth paying taxes for (national defense?). If we do not properly educate our children, we’d might as well hand the world over to China and other nations that have figured it out. I will agree that much of public education has failed us, but that is not the way it has to be in West Bend.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 01, 2007 at 0828 hrs
Hey folks - sorry but I just need to respond to Orv again because his comment really burns my butt. LESS? - sure we could spend less on the war against terrorism, we could spend less on law enforcement, we could spend less on infrastructure. Nancy Pelosi would agree. Education is a matter of national defense. What is not shown in the referendum info is the big investment we are making in math, science, and engineering (the number one priority from our community surveys). We need fewer poets and more engineers. In full disclosure I will admit to being an engineer. I have been in small business most of my career and I can tell you there are times to cut back, but there are also times when you must invest or die. The big question is not just the money but whether it is being spent well.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 01, 2007 at 0858 hrs
As a product of the West Bend School district, I agree with Owen and Charlie Hillman. Great comment on New Berlin district, by the way. My parents still live in the house in West Bend in their retirement and the low property taxes was part of that decision. I substitute taught for four years before I found a better job including a full-time semester at West Bend West H.S. The schools still put out a higher quality graduate than most Wis High Schools at a more reasonable price per capita than most districts.
As a student I didn’t realize that the centralized shop, art classes etc. were a major money saver, I just thought it was cool (Not to mention some administrative offices). For people unfamiliar, East and West H.S. are connected. I had a quarter of my classes in the central or East H.S. building even though I am a West grad. The expensive to maintain Art and shop classes, for example, were in the central building to save costs serving both schools. It sounds as if something similar is being planned at the Middle School level. After all the referendums attempted throughout the state on top of an already heavy property tax burdern, it is nice to hear some attempted fiscal responsibility coming from a board somewhere. If the total bill sounds high, fight to trim it, but at least the local board seems to have a clue and that is rare. Usually ‘having a clue’ in Government means you are part of the ineffective minority or a political outcast like Tom Reynolds. mee spel gud cuz of WBHS!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 01, 2007 at 0942 hrs
As a parent of West bend students I fullysupport this referendum. The schools are in need of so much repair that it makes sense to do it all at once before costs go up even more. To answer the question of what else is being asked for I have one example. There are dozens if not hundreds of windows inthe district that are single pane glass. They need to be replaced. I have asked a friend that sells windows what kind of return we could expect on our investment and he said in homes the return would be 5-7 years. If the school gets that kind of return on new windows it will be well worth it.
Pat herdrich and this board are really on top of this and have made great decisions. Especially good are Kris Beaver and Charlie Hillman.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 01, 2007 at 1029 hrs
I wholeheartedly support Charlie’s position in regard to the real purpose of our schools - that of education and focus on programming. We are, and should be, proud of the results we are getting (which has little to do with the facilities).
However, I also share Owen’s viewpoint that referendums should not be used for “normal” maintenance items. This is one of the things that has given all referendums an automatically bad impression. Some districts have eliminated all maintenance spending from their operating budgets, using the resultant problems as reasons for the “need” for referendum and thereby skirt the intent of the caps in holding down spending. That has not been the case in West Bend, but including maintenance items in this plan could open the door for that mindset in the future.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 01, 2007 at 1145 hrs
Mr. Hillman, certainly you are not going to argue that our tax rate is not enough to handle maintenance and facility needs are you? Since the district has been growing (just in sheer number of condos, homes, etc.) the tax income should have increased no matter what the tax rate. Where does that money go? Please don’t say salaries and benefits as those can be adjusted through cuts and employee subsidies. Perhaps looking at cutting administrative costs (i.e. leasing an SUV for the superintendent, adding another athletic director at the shared High School, the number of assistants for each of the superintendent, asst. superintendent and other administrators, and the vote to substantially increase administrative salaries last year would) make a dent. I would also say that any district that did not factor growth and maintenance into their budgets is not necessarily fiscally responsible.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 01, 2007 at 1420 hrs
Just a few comments for the people that have criticized this referendum.
1. The number of houses in a city does not necessarily mean that a school district will have more money. That is because the state has put revenue limits on schools and they have been in place since 1993.
2. New Berlin did save money and put up a new school but are now considering a referendum to be able to cover operating expenses. So, while the idea is appealing it is not the panacea that some would have you believe.
3. In an ideal situation the boards of education 10, 15 or 20 years ago should have put together a comprehensive plan to address these issues. They did not. Now we as a board and community must make up for lost time and planning. So, no Rich the things that need to be done are not going to be done within the current operations budget. There is just too much to do.
Let me address some specific issues:
Windows: Single pane glass will be replaced with double pane to increase energy efficiency. This is not decorative it is a money saver. ROI of about 5 years.Secure entrances will be put into buildings so that the district can closely control who has access to the student population during the school day. If you don’t support this, in my opinion, you are being very short sighted. This was a very high priority on the community survey that we conducted.
Fire protection: Any time you work on old buildings new regulations begin to apply. This is the case with fire protection. Meaning Sprinklers. It is our understanding that as of this fall the regulations will get even more strict on sprinklers. So, if we were to do even basic renovations to buildings we would add in some cases in excess of $100,000 just to get up to code on fire protection.
In closing, the dollar amounts for the various projects are on the front page of the paper today. This district and board have been very open and honest with the taxpayers of West Bend. That will continue. Also, in the interest of full disclosure I personally have blogged here for the last year or two as buffettfan71. I did not give my actual name as I did not want to haveanyone misconstrue that anything that i said in any way spoke for the board of education in West Bend. I will continue to blog and I can assure the public that I will be as frugal with the districts money as I am with my own. I keep the house at 60 degrees in the winter. it drives my family crazy, but I’m cheap. I will make sure that form follows function when buildings are designed. I encourage people to hold me to my word.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 01, 2007 at 1525 hrs
It is a bit embarrassing that we have not kept up with our maintenance issues. I’m sure I don’t need to point out that these were the sins of a board and administration long gone. But still, point well taken. When you look at issues such as newer energy efficient windows or insulation for Silverbrook, it’s hard to say whether that’s a capital or operating expense. I know it seems like we have been playing a game of chicken with our facilities and I understand that such a strategy should irritate the taxpayers. It certainly hasn’t been my intention. As to administrative expense, our per pupil administrative costs are $580 vs state average of $778. That’s a little like being the skinniest kid at fat camp, but still worth pointing out. You can be absolutely certain that our superintendent is looking to eliminate all unnecessary expenses. A good example would be to get rid of some of the foolish classes taught in High School (fashion choices??!!!) This takes time, But some new costs, like outfitting rooms for an engineering curriculum, are very necessary.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 01, 2007 at 1542 hrs
I KNEW IT! I was pretty sure that buffettfan71 wasn’t your real name, and I was convinced of it when I tried to look you up in the phone book and your name wasn’t there.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 01, 2007 at 1549 hrs
Mr. Hillman, as another engineer , I appreciate your not accepting the relativity of our administrative costs as necessarily a good thing. When it comes to municipal and school spending, I am not a big believer in relative costs - if all districts have the same ideas and expenditures, why have multiple school districts and boards!
With the current tax climate here in Wisconsin and with other similar sized and even smaller referendums failing, I assume the board has at least thought about the possibility of the referendum not passing. If the referendum fails, what is the plan or at least what are the thoughts about what will be done in that event?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 02, 2007 at 1737 hrs
Hey Rich - certainly we have the option of just doing what we’re doing. We’d be increasingly crowded and probably have to drop some courses, but the sky wouldn’t fall or anything. I know this is a lot to ask of the taxpayer and the smart money would bet against passage, but I’ve spent most of my career starting high tech businesses against the odds, so I’m used to sleepless nights. I just have faith in the people of West Bend that once the sticker shock subsides and people really look at what it means to them and how important this is for the future of the community, they might surprise the pundits.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 03, 2007 at 0858 hrs
As a parent of 2 children in the district I fully support this proposal. Even if my kids weren’t in school anymore I would support it. WB is an excellent District, and I believe in public education…no matter the cost! Take a look at many of the schools in this district, they need attention. Public schools are not companies that can raise prices to cover more expenses. There is nothing a school district can do to raise more money for such things as new schools. They cannot “sell” any goods to raise money. So there options are limited. I hope many people in the district see it as this way, but they probably won’t. They would rather support a President, fighting a war in Iraq, in which our tax dollars are paying to rebuild!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 03, 2007 at 2118 hrs
Scott, when the referendum fails, I’m sure the school district would be more than happy to accept a check or two from you and other supporters. You can still do your part...no matter the cost!
Also, there is no relationship between taxes used for federal spending on the military and those used for local spending on schools districts. An increase in one does not mean a decrease in the other. Or perhaps you knew that, and were just looking to inject a drive-by Bush slam.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 03, 2007 at 2141 hrs
The closing of Badger is on the list of to-do’s. If the referendum passes, I assume it will be demolished and the land sold. Is that revenue included in the school facilities plan and if so do we still need $119 million? That is obviously a prime piece of real estate that will catch a significant amount of money. Where will those proceeds go - into the school budget to be spent somewhere else?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 04, 2007 at 0921 hrs
To Rich - Yes Badger will be sold and that money goes back into facilties. I’m not sure of the mechanism, but if we don’t spend all the referendum money, it just doesn’t get collected. We had to make some assumptions on building material and labor cost increases over the years. I think that we have good timing here. With the bust in real estate, things may be cheaper than we thought. Let’s hope. I think that the northern part of Badger (the old section) may turn into housing similar to the Amity building. The south part will probably make way for a new grocery store or something. And yes, it is valuable real estate.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 04, 2007 at 1356 hrs
Tony,
There is a connection between federal spending and the amount of money spent locally by school districts. A vast Majority of the money spent on Special Ed. comes form the federal gov’t. In the last three years the West Bend school district has had to cut back on the number of students it allows into the early chilhood programs because there is not enough funding. This is for students needing extra education because they are from impoverished families or in need of additional educational support. There have been other cuts, but those are just a couple. So, the money being spent overseas needs to come from somewhere and a certain amount of it has come from education funding.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 04, 2007 at 1710 hrs
Kris, I think you misinterpreted my comment to Scott. I was reacting to his implication that local residents wouldn’t support the capital spending referendum because they are too focused on defending the Iraq War expenditures. These are two separate concepts with two separate funding mechanisms. Furthermore, to my knowledge, the referendum has nothing to do with special education funding. I would also question your statement that there have been federal special education cuts due to Iraq War costs. My understanding is that these are completely different appropriations bills, but I could be mistaken. I’m not saying cuts aren’t in play, just that they wouldn’t be in play due to Iraq. Interested in any evidence you could point me to.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 04, 2007 at 1817 hrs
I’d like to expand on the early childhood programs. When I first came on board I was skeptical of some of these programs. But I used to consult for the auto industry and they always talked about the 1cent/1dime/1dollar rule. Fix a defect at the factory - one cent, at the dealership - one dime, after it’s driven away - 1 dollar. It’s the same with some of these kids. If we don’t invest now, they will cost us all dearly later. That is why I’m such a big fan of the Boys and Girls Club - they provide the guidance and moral foundation for many kids who really need it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 04, 2007 at 1953 hrs
i could have been more clear Tony if I had used the example of there only being so many ways to cut the pie. The government has a certain amount of money and they decide how they will divide it and education funding has been reduced in the last few years. I have been told during the budgeting process by special ed people that there is $5 billion fewer dollars being sent to local districts across the nation because it is already spent. The biggest draw on the budget right now is Iraq. I am not saying I am against that spending, but nothing happens in a vacuum. If more money were being spent on some other part of government then maybe there would be less money for Iraq or education or roads who knows. these are just examples. that was my point.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 04, 2007 at 2109 hrs
I understood your point, I was just looking for any evidence you had to back it up.
The biggest draw on the budget right now is Iraq.
Actually, we only spend a bit over 4% of our GDP on all our military operations, including Iraq, as compared to around 7.5% during the Cold War. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid were more than twice our military spend last year.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 04, 2007 at 2208 hrs
Mr. Hillman
I hope that you are still not mad at me. I do like your analogy about the 1 cent/1 dime/1 dollar rule. I have never heard this before but it makes perfect sense to me.
My disagreement is with your statement “If we don’t invest now, they will cost us all dearly later.” The problem is we have been literally poring money into schools for decades, but instead of getting better ( in other words, a larger return on our investment) it is getting worse and worse by larger amounts.
When looking at investments, normally one looks at past performance to try and get an indication of future results. I am sure that the perfomance of West Bend schools is better on average than the rest of the state, but what about the rest of the country/world.
I will give you the fact that West Bend schools are better than most but as a nation, we lag behind other countries significantly. Remeber the John Stossel Specail of about a year ago called “Stupid in America” We are not even in 2nd place anymore, and there is a lot of catching up to do.
I would suggest that before you ask for huge amounts of money for infrastructure improvements, you demand accountability from the teachers/students.
West Bend does not have the same excuses that MPS does or even some of the better Milwaukee County suburbs. After all, for the msot part, the people of West Bend are well educated and demand the same from their children. so the social excuse should not be an issue. So the excuses for performance should be minimal.
Yes, I still say “Less” because this will be the largest (by far) school spending referendum in state history.
Just to give an example, when I fought the Oak Creek referendun about 8 years ago of $37.4 million, it was the 3rd largest referendum in state history at the time. The lure of the state paying 2/3 of the cost is very enticing. Just remember under the formula, wealthy districts may actually lose money when passing such a referendum. For example, Madison sends about 70 cents of each dollar outside of the district because of the funding formula.
So the message is be careful what you ask for…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 04, 2007 at 2348 hrs
Hey Orv - no problem. Every once in a while I have a hissy fit but get over it in a hurry. I am a huge Stossel fan. I have an autographed copy of his book. I not only saw “Stupid in America”, I taped it and gave it to my superintendent. Didn’t you love the lady union boss from New York - what a piece of work. That kind of show makes me determined that we must never let education be hijacked like that here in West Bend. And you are right about the funding formulas. So often they force you to do what you know is wrong. It’s enough to make your head explode. I’ll end with a favorite poem from A.A.Milne. “Sometimes when the fights begin, I think I’ll let the dragons win. But then again perhaps I won’t. Because they’re dragons and I don’t.”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 05, 2007 at 1113 hrs
It is a very good thing to be able to have a heated discussion about issue’s such as school funding and then be able to walk away without being enemies.
Someday we should get together and discuss these issue’s face to face.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 05, 2007 at 2032 hrs
I finally got hold of the tax rate numbers from www.wistax.org. West Bend does indeed have the lowest mil rate for schools at 6.35% for the 2005-06 period. However, the municipal rate is the highest (7.90%) of the 3 other communities we compare with: Hartford (6.1%), Kewaskum (5.9%), and Slinger (6.55%). Net tax rate for all communites are within 2% of each other. By significantly raising our school tax rate, we will by far be the highest taxed community in Washington County. I think the city council should reconsider paving the bike/walking trail and lower our taxes before this referendum comes up for vote.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 20, 2007 at 1315 hrs
I don’t think anyone has a problem with keeping the schools upto date. The problem is the money. Why not create a sales tax to pay for all this? It would be much more fair to have everyone including the kids help pay for this rather than just the home owners.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 19, 2007 at 0811 hrs
I’m not sure I understand the overcrowding argument: DPI web site shows 1998 enrollment at 6,854 and with little variation since then it is now 6,816.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 19, 2007 at 1639 hrs
fcktubel fdupejbl http://nkpcspez.com langbsey fdniltva lsaopfco
Posted by zkpcuzep on November 09, 2007 at 1623 hrs
generic valium generic sildenafil generic xanax cetirizine buy alprazolam online desyrel cipro buy adipex norvasc generic viagra online generic viagra order diazepam prednisone allopurinol viagra buy soma lunesta generic prilosec ambien online fosamax viagra propecia bupropion meridia online buy adipex generic plavix order valium online buy prozac celecoxib esgic ibuprofen order ultram order vicodin online order viagra generic valium buy phentermine purchase soma online buy zoloft generic valium prozac online prozac online sibutramine buy levitra seroxat
234347645Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 12, 2007 at 2100 hrs
Total Entries: 19656
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 09:52 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 98
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/12/2012 04:51 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).