I have to wonder... What is next? I know I don't deal with OASD issues real often (and I am sure that someone will tell me that I don't know what I am talking about because of it) but there is quite a price tag that the district has put on this "restructuring" of the schools and I think that it should be addressed by the taxpayers too.
Now I don't know if the $60 million price tag is official or not. It is what the ONW reported along with building a new school on the north side. I would hope that the reporter that wrote the story had verified both statements with a district source. I am not inclined to verify it. It is what it is.
I will say that it is too much. That is way too much money to spend on a plan that in my eyes does not serve the purpose of which it was intended when they started.
Wasn't the original recommendation to close SIX schools? Now it is only 2 or 3 and one of them was slated to close even before this all started.
The plan now is to expand SAGE (my guess they are doing it to avoid laying off teachers and please the union), reconfigure several schools (one of which isn't even paid for from original construction), and bus kids from one side of town to the other.
My question is... WHY?
What would it take to just fix what we have and leave well enough alone? Stop deferring the maintenance and get the buildings up to snuff so that the district can actually do what they are supposed to be doing rather than focus on this "plan".
Just some thoughts on the issue. What are yours???
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
$60M is just the principal. Someone needs to figure out what the interest would be.
And no, it won't be enough. Weinsheim, Bowen, McDermott, Kavanaugh will find a way to have this increased another $10M-$20M.
Hey Kent. Do another poll including that Jahnke guy.
$60M-$45M-$30M
In the economy we are in right now, even a $10M referendum would most likely fail.
I'm fedup with all the union pandering that goes on. Kent mentioned "my guess they are doing it to avoid laying off teachers and please the union"
Close schools but no teachers laid off???
Then the city and all that talk on medical costs we pay for those people.
Somethigns got to change all this.
After several attempts, I could not get all 6 names to show up. I hadn't realized that it wasn't there again until this morning so I changed the order (Sorry Daggett).
As for the union comment, I am not sure of that statement. It was simply a guess based on the fact that the district is closing schools citing declining enrollment but not laying off teachers? Something doesn't add up. Maybe it's that everyday math stuff again...
Here's more about the Teachers Union and how they will even go to court to keep teachers from being laid off.
The State Teachers' Union claims that 'Every Kid Deserves a Great School.' We agree, yet the union went to court (twice!) to close great public schools.
On this site, you can find out more about online public charter schools (Virtual Schools) and how these GREAT SCHOOLS work for Wisconsin kids, parents, educators and taxpayers. Together, we can save these schools and let more than 3,000 kids attend the great public school of their choice.
You can find out more about online public charter schools and the state teachers' union attempt to close these schools at the home of the Wisconsin Coalition for Virtual School Families.
they dont have to lay off teachers they just dont replace those that quit
That is what they said about Poupa retiring. "We are cutting his position after his retirement." They didn't cut the position, they renamed it and promoted someone else whose position was filled by someone else on down. So much for savings.
They may not replace that specific position, but they find away to keep that staff number the same.
Several principals quit and they were replaced with other district staff. Were those staff person's original positions cut through the attrition process? Nope, someone was hired to replace the promoted staff. So much for saving through attrition.
Actually when Mr. Pouba retired, he was NOT replaced. They just reorganized peoples' duties, passing his out to various people in Central Office but you are incorrect, the number of Central Office Administrators decreased by one after he left. If you think I am wrong, please state the name of the person who was promoted and the name of the person who was hired to fill the promoted person's job.
they will find a way to keep the teachers and administration jobs filled no matter the cost.
We can thank the tax and spend school board!
Post a Comment