BrookfieldNOW.com
search all things local
     
Blog Home |  About this Blog       Welcome to MyCommunityNOW - Blogs Sign in | Join
Browse By tag All Tags » Elections » High Schools (RSS)

Related Tags

Where were the other 4,135 NO votes?

By Kyle Prast
Thursday, Apr 3 2008, 12:58 PM

Don't worry, I am not going to drag on about the referendum too much, but I think some things need analyzing before I move on to other areas of interest. It is important to understand why it passed and how the process works...for next time.

Some of us asked ourselves, how did the referendum pass in a climate of rising food prices, increasing taxes and the prospect of gasoline hitting $4/gal by summer? Pretty remarkable considering the dollar amount, $62.2 million, was sizable for a declining enrollment.

First, voter turn out was key to the referendum passing or failing. No question about it, apathy played a huge role in the referendum's passing, but the timing of the election played a larger part. The apathetic are always with us.

Voter turn out was expected to be higher. I expected it would be lower.

Holding an election the Tuesday after Easter vacation and before all the snow birds returned home, indicated to me turnout would be low. By placing the referendum question on the spring ballot then, known for lower turnout than a November Presidential election, timing alone eliminated a huge percentage of the voters. (I am pretty sure Waukesha County had a 97% turnout in 2004.)

The spring election, based on past voting trends, was sure to garner fewer total votes from the general public than the November election.

Some might be thinking that because of the dire need in our schools, the district felt it could not wait until November. They could have included the referendum question however, in the Presidential primary, where a broader field of voters participates. 

Second, there only are so many YES votes in the Elmbrook School district. Getting those likely Yes voters out to vote then was key to passage.

Elmbrook informed (they are not allowed to promote) the need to renovate their schools every chance they could on tours, at PTO meetings, on their cable channel, and in publications sent to residents. The only alternative they gave was to let things continue as they were.

Considering only 1 out of every 4 homes in the district have children in Elmbrook schools, getting out the vote amongst those parents* was very important. They were the key Yes voters.

Low voter turnout of the general voting population, who don't have children in Elmbrook Schools, then was key to this referendum's passage.

But the district also needed to add to that number of Yes votes. How would they do that? The HSST. 

Sure, some people changed their minds because the total dollar amount was lower. Maybe some thought this time the cost was not too outrageous. But next to timing the election, the HSST, I think accounted for a goodly portion of those 577 new yes votes this go around.

With referendums, timing and perception is everything. 

If you did not bother to vote last Tuesday and now are upset that the referendum passed, I can only say we get the government we deserve sometimes. Don't let it happen again. 

 

Next time, a look at the HSST and what it represented.

*Not all parents voted this time for the referendum. I don't blame those of you who did. As a parent we all want what is best for our children. I am just sorry Elmbrook did not get the most for our tax dollar here and we still have done nothing to address maintaining our schools.  

Links:

counter hit xanga

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield
Vicki Mckenna 

 

Oh oh, you can't do that

By Kyle Prast
Monday, Mar 31 2008, 11:25 PM

I'm not sure who dropped off this referendum brochure; it is a copy of Elmbrook Schools April 1, 2008 High Schools Facilities info sheets.

There was no disclaimer on it stating where it came from or who paid for the printing.

When I opened it, it was obvious it was not just run off on someone's laser printer. The paper size was very unusual: 11 1/4 x 11 inches.

If it was from Elmbrook Schools, they should have known it is illegal to place any flier in or on a mailbox.

If it was from the Vote Yes group, then that should have been noted?

 

 

No matter. I was concerned that voters would not know there even was a referendum to be voted on come April 1st. I think this will let residents know. How was yours delivered?

 

FYI, affixing any kind of mail or flier to a mailbox, inside or out is not allowed. I checked with my favorite Postmistress today, and she said this type of delivery was not OK with the U.S.Postal Service. In fact, if any fliers survived the weekend and rain, if the mailman sees them on his route, he is to bring them back to the post office and the listed responsible party can be charged postage due. 

The picture is not from my home, by the way. I grabbed mine on my way out to do an errand on Saturday and then noticed that all of the mailboxes on my street had them stuck under the flags. This was true of other streets in other neighborhoods.

My flier had a personalized note on it. It read: "The referendum contains significant improvements to academic areas :)" 

I thought the word significant is a bit strong since by the flier's own statistics $22,694,288 goes for mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing for 275,707 square feet at Central and 243,675 square feet at East.

Add to the flier's $22.7mil (rounded) for mechanicals, and the $14, $15.8, $18.2, how much? million dollars for new gyms and we are well over 1/2 of the cost for non-academics

Today I found out that the referendum includes air conditioning the gyms: 2 acres of gyms at least 2 stories tall. That utility bill money is not going for academics!

As usual, the more information I get, the more questions I have. This $22.7mil struck me as not being consistent with some recent information I received on the HVAC replacement alone being $26 million. Glen Allgier was good enough to explain: The higher number reflects those "soft" costs that were included elsewhere.

Brookfield Academy's $12.5 mil high school, we can too

Correction: C G SCHMIDT Cost summary of Referendum


ACADEMICS, NOT ATHLETICS AND AIR CONDITIONING--did you know they plan on air conditioning even the gyms?

Tomorrow is the big day, Millions of Dollars Tuesday! Be sure to vote.

 

Elmbrook School District Referendum Links:

Frequently Asked Questions  Not to be missed!

Cost Breakdowns of Type of Work (cost per square footage)

Architect's Conceptual High School Floorplans--East and Central

Facility "Needs" comparison of failed 2007 and present 2008 referendums

Tax Calculator  

counter hit xanga

Former 2007 Referendum Facilities Facts Sheets (Still a good read)

 

Links: Brookfield7, Betterbrookfield Vicki Mckenna 

 

$5,280 raise for Dr. Gibson answers the question

By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, Mar 19 2008, 12:37 PM

Jessica Rasmussen reports, "The Elmbrook superintendent will see $5,280 added to his salary for the 2008-2009 school year.", so that answers my question from last week, Will Gibson get hefty raise this year?

"The School Board voted, 5-1, to approve the 4 percent package increase, which will bump Superintendent Matt Gibson's salary to $147,510." (Remember that Dr. Gibson's complete wage and benefit package is substantially more than just salary.)

True to form, Patrick Murphy did not support that raise. I'm going to miss Patrick's presence on the board. " 'I think these wages are excessive,' Murphy said, adding that the administration should show restraint in light of a possible $62.2 million construction project, which will go to referendum April 1."

I agree. It is rather difficult to swallow the Superintendent telling us how dire the need is for improved facilities in our schools or how we face $1.5 to $2million dollars in budget cuts due to declining enrollments and then see him accept a raise like this one.

But Murphy's opinion was not shared by all. Some "viewed the increase as both deserved and as inconsequential in the district's budget."

The $5,280 raise is 3.58%, below the QEO of 3.8% (which I think only applies to teachers).  Often a person in Dr. Gibson's leadership position will make a gesture to refuse the raise or at least make an offer to donate it back to some cause connected with the schools. I have not heard any report of that.

I don't know how deserved the raise was however, since Gibson's contact was only extended by one year, through June 30, 2010--one year beyond the coming school year. If the board had not extended it, his contract expiration date would have ended at the end of June 2009.

.


Elmbrook School District Referendum Links:

Wording of the April 1, 2008 $62.190.000 referendum 

Architect's Conceptual High School Floorplans--East and Central

Facility "Needs" comparison of failed 2007 and present 2008 referendums

Key Academic Benefits: It's direct address is:  www.elmbrookschools.org/.../displayFile.aspx

(I am sorry, I still cannot access it from the 2008 referendum Table of Contents page.)

Tour Schedule  

Tax Calculator  

Frequently Asked Questions

Elmbrook asks for smaller expansion--JSOnline (Also includes links to past articles)

Still no link to the 2008 Election Edition of the Link. Hope you got your copy.
counter hit xanga


The countdown continues: Just 13 days until MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Email me your thoughts on the $62.2 million dollar referendum.

ACADEMICS, NOT ATHLETICS: VOTE NO

Links: Brookfield7, Betterbrookfield Vicki Mckenna 

 


 

Past referendum posts tagged & will Gibson get hefty raise this year?

By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, Mar 12 2008, 12:15 AM

I spent last night going through all of my past Practically Speaking postings from the last referendum up until Easter 2007. I gave them a quick read and made the appropriate subject tags.

Many of them are still very pertinent this year. I hope to make a master list with titles, but if that never materializes, you can just click on the High School tag or Elmbrook to the right and they all should come up.

Brookfield7's postings can be found by typing in High School in the search box at the top of that blog. (I will try to list those too if time allows.)

One tidbit I found of interest was about Matt Gibson's raise from last year, just before the referendum. Last year he got an extra $4,881.

Uncle Matt wants you, Even if it means we have to build bigger schools:

Why would the administration, led by Matt Gibson, want to recruit every possible student if this means greater expenses for district taxpayers and shortages of classroom space?

One reader commented, “He’s trying to build a for profit empire out of our wallet! The bigger the empire; the bigger the check.”

Well big empires justify big raises, and we just gave Dr. Matt Gibson a hefty one of $4,881 for a total of $142,230 this year.

 

I wonder what it will be this year? 


Elmbrook School District Referendum Links:

Wording of the April 1, 2008 $62.190.000 referendum 

Architect's Conceptual High School Floorplans--East and Central

Facility "Needs" comparison of failed 2007 and present 2008 referendums

Key Academic Benefits: It's direct address is:  www.elmbrookschools.org/.../displayFile.aspx

(I am sorry, I still cannot access it from the 2008 referendum Table of Contents page.) 

Tour Schedule  

Tax Calculator  

Frequently Asked Questions

Elmbrook asks for smaller expansion--JSOnline (Also includes links to past articles)
counter hit xanga

 

The countdown begins: Just 20 days until MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Email me your thoughts on the $62.2 million dollar referendum.

ACADEMICS, NOT ATHLETICS: VOTE NO

Links: Brookfield7, Betterbrookfield Vicki Mckenna 

 

 

 

 


 

Elmbrook: We agree, nix the office cubes

By Kyle Prast
Friday, Mar 7 2008, 02:56 PM

Although I am not in favor of the present $62.2+ million dollar referendum, I was pleased to see this practical solution for creating larger classrooms while on the Central High School Tour this week. They are proposing removing the approx. 8' x 9' office cubes from some of the classrooms.

(These would be those classrooms you visit at the top of the stairs at the beginning of the tour--same ones that last year were mentioned as only having 3 working outlets: The Tale of Three Outlets)

I have no idea what they were thinking when this school addition was built--like so many "new" ideas, it seemed like a good idea at the time? But the office within the classroom really plays havoc with the arrangement of student desks.

You can see in the first photo the front of the classroom with the green board. The 15 student desks are arranged perpendicular to the front wall.

The second photo shows the teacher's office cube in the back. The
remaining 15 desks are arranged perpendicular to the back wall.

Each set of 15 desks face each other.

Now, I am not claiming credit for this idea. I think the referendum committee just saw what I saw, a relatively easy and inexpensive way to expand and improve the layout of some classrooms.
 

I had suggested removing those small teacher's office cubes last year in a posting : Post WW2 era buildings = modern construction: 

One “need” on the referendum wish list is larger classrooms. Classrooms at Central are not large enough. Solution: knock out the teacher’s office cube inside the classroom and suddenly the room meets No Child Left Behind standards. Presently we are told the rooms are 750 sq. ft. If the office were removed the room would exceed 825 sq. ft. The layout of the room would improve too. The concept of a teacher having their own classroom is necessary at elementary schools but not at the high school level. This work can all be done “in house” with maintenance staff during the summer as other districts do.

By removing the office cube, the layout of desks improves and the number of potential students per room could increase--if needed. The teacher would be moved to a department office room that would have a private area for student/teacher meetings. Moving the teacher's office out of the classroom also helps when the classroom is used by another teacher. Where this departmental teacher's office area will be is not know at this time Principal LaBonte told us.

I don't believe we need a $102 million referendum ($62.2 million dollar + interest) to make this type of improvement.  Like School Board Member Patrick Murphy, I favor increasing our Capital Improvement budget--I suggested  by $1million a year, last year Murphy suggested by $2 million.

 

Elmbrook School District Referendum Links:

Wording of the April 1, 2008 $62.190.000 referendum 

Architect's Conceptual High School Floorplans--East and Central

Facility "Needs" comparison of failed 2007 and present 2008 referendums

Key Academic Benefits: It's direct address is:  www.elmbrookschools.org/.../displayFile.aspx

(I am sorry, I still cannot access it from the 2008 referendum Table of Contents page.)

Tour Schedule  

Tax Calculator  

Frequently Asked Questions

Elmbrook asks for smaller expansion--JSOnline (Also includes links to past articles)
counter hit xanga

 

The countdown begins: Just 25 days until MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Email me your thoughts on the $62.2 million dollar referendum.

 

Links: Betterbrookfield Vicki Mckenna 

 

Yikes! Gas prices rise 14 cents overnight!.


 

On tour at Central High School and forum

By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, Mar 5 2008, 03:31 PM

Last night I took the tour of Brookfield Central High School before the Elmbrook Candidate Forum. It did not seem there was much interest in either event.  

There were only 7 residents on the tour plus candidate Gary Jones. Principal LaBonte led the tour along with Central's head of maintenance, Shawn (I did not catch his last name or title). It was helpful to have Shawn along to answer some questions. It seemed I was the only one on the tour who would not be voting for the referendum. I took some pictures and will be posting them in future blogs.

The Candidate Forum was not very well attended either--maybe 19 people? Of that audience, 5 were connected with Elmbrook: Board members Wartman, Ziegler, Allgaier, and Murphy, and the Parent Leadership Council leader.

No real surprises in the Q & A, the candidates all supported the referendum.

I am not sure why more people did not attend these events. Possibly their minds are already made up on the referendum?

Is your mind made up yet?

 

Elmbrook School District Referendum Links:

Wording of the April 1, 2008 $62.190.000 referendum 

Architect's Conceptual High School Floorplans--East and Central

Facility "Needs" comparison of failed 2007 and present 2008 referendums

Key Academic Benefits: It's direct address is:  www.elmbrookschools.org/.../displayFile.aspx

(I am sorry, I still cannot access it from the 2008 referendum Table of Contents page.)

Tour Schedule  

Tax Calculator  

Frequently Asked Questions

Elmbrook asks for smaller expansion--JSOnline (Also includes links to past articles)
counter hit xanga

 

The countdown begins: Just 27 days until MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Email me your thoughts on the $62.2 million dollar referendum.

 

Links: Betterbrookfield Vicki Mckenna 

 


 

And then there were 3, Elmbrook Candidate Forum and tour tonight

By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, Mar 4 2008, 10:18 AM

So much for any choice in School Board candidates: Brooks Fleming now dropped out of the school board race. But there is still the School Board Candidate Forum tonight at Central High School's library, 7:30 - 9:30pm.

If you come earlier, Principal LaBonte will be giving a tour starting at 6pm. However, keep in mind the principal is not the best person to answer your maintenance questions.

Although there are no contested races, I still want to know if Gary Jones and David Marcello are worth of my vote. I do not vote for candidates simply because they are on the ballot.

Tom Gehl will be getting my vote though. Although we do not always agree 100%, I am grateful he is on the board.

Tonight may be a good opportunity for you to ask these new board members what they think of the new O.S. warning policy for 8th graders as well as their views on the April 1 referendum.
counter hit xanga

 

Links: Betterbrookfield Vicki Mckenna 

.

The countdown begins: Just 27 days until MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Email me your thoughts on the $62.2 million dollar referendum.

 


 

Virtually there: church, geysers, and classroom

By Kyle Prast
Sunday, Mar 2 2008, 08:49 PM

Technology can be a wonderful thing. Two weeks ago, we had that snowstorm warning on Sunday and the weatherman cautioned people to stay home. We were rather torn as to what to do, but since we just had 2 weather related fender benders that week, we chickened out and stayed home. The great thing was though, we did not need to miss our church service.

Thanks to the internet and some tech. minded members, we sat around the computer screen and watched the live sermon  from the comfort of our home! Not quite as good as being there, but we did virtually see and hear the LIVE service. I can also go back to the church website and review a sermon if I want to.

This technology has hit our beloved Yellowstone National Park too. We are what is kindly referred to as Geyser Geeks*--people who love to sit and observe geysers. If all goes according to plan, this summer we'll make our 5th pilgrimage to geyserland in 7 years.

To help us bide our time until the day we set foot on the Upper Geyser Basin, we now have the option of watching some of the geysers LIVE on the park's newly installed geysercam. Just this afternoon we watched Old Faithful and Plume go off. Pretty terrific.

As time goes on, I believe we will see more and more of this type of LIVE broadcast technology. It will enable people to "attend" events from the comfort of their own homes.

Currently, our Elmbrook School District is proposing a $62.2 million dollar high school referendum. The District states this is needed to solve our future facility needs. But I believe, because of technological advances, we can implement this type of live, virtual broadcast technology in our schools and thereby reduce our classroom space needs.

Virtual live broadcast could be used for some classes for all students, and virtual technology could also be used for all classes for some students. Either way, virtual education reduces the burden on classrooms. It also reduces the need for having a teacher for every class.

Virtual, live broadcast and virtual school should be looked at BEFORE we commit to 20 years of higher taxes.
counter hit xanga

*The official geyser watchers are called Geyser Gazers.

Links: Betterbrookfield Vicki Mckenna 

.

The countdown begins: Just 29 days until MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Email me your thoughts on the $62.2 million dollar referendum.

Be sure to read Representative Rich Zipperer's Legislative Update: Right to Bear Arms, Tax Relief, Ending Sanctuary Cities, Banning Partial Birth Abortion, and Virtual Charter Schools.
 

 



 

Hillary, we agree, Steve Schwei, we do too!

By Kyle Prast
Thursday, Feb 28 2008, 01:45 PM

I have often said that if you wait long enough, there will be something that two opposing camps can agree on. Hillary Clinton and I do not see eye to eye on much, but when she gave her "Celestial Choir" speech the other day, we finally found our common ground!

Clinton raps Obama's 'celestial choir' campaign:

Hillary Clinton (or should I say Hillary Rodham Clinton?) today mocked Barack Obama's campaign style as one that portrays a divine-like picture of problem-solving to voters when the challenges America face are much more complex...

"None of the problems we face will be easily solved," she said before delivering a fanciful description of an Obama speech.

"Now I could stand up here and say, 'Let's just get everybody together. Let's get unified. The sky will open. The lights will come down. Celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect.' 

"Maybe I've just lived a little long, but I have no illusions about how hard this is going to be. You are not going to wave a magic wand and have the special interest disappear," she said.

So I find myself agreeing with Sen. Clinton, "Maybe I've just lived a little long (well, not quite as long as Hillary), but I have no illusions about how hard this is going to be" either. I don't think we can afford her programs any more than we can afford his, however.

I also found myself agreeing with Mr. Schwei's assessment of the emphasis on athletics over academics in a Jan. 16th article:

Board member Steve Schwei questioned the construction of new gymnasiums and renovation of classrooms. The new space should be allocated to academics, not athletic areas, he said.

Ready or not, the $62.2 million dollar high school referendum is coming in just 1 month on April 1st. Spread the word.

.
counter hit xanga

 

Links: Betterbrookfield Vicki Mckenna 


 

Don't forget your Elmbrook school survey

By Kyle Prast
Monday, Feb 25 2008, 08:44 PM

If you want to give the Elmbrook School District your 2 cents on their online Strategic Planning Survey, the deadline is this  Wednesday, Feb. 27.

You are to select 1 to 5 of their pre-written responses for questions 1 - 4, but they also allow for you to select "Other" and then tell them what your other concern/priority is. The next 2 questions allow you to comment; the last 3 questions are just a yes or no.

If you did select "Other", want to share what your "Others" were as well as your comments for questions 5 & 6 via email? I can quote your comments on a future blog, but you can remain anonymous to other readers.

Ready or not, the referendum is coming in just a little over a month! 


counter hit xanga

 

Links: Betterbrookfield Vicki Mckenna 


 

Money does not buy HAPPINESS

By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, Apr 3 2007, 11:18 AM
One of my regular readers sent me this today. I think if fits in well with the latest vote yes postcard.

"Today's the big day! Will our community whimsically vote to add more debt to our already outstanding sum of $2,798.66* for every man, woman and child in the Elmbrook school district? (YIKES) Or will we Just Say No!"

The way you vote for this referendum today will speak volumes to your children about what is important in life.

If you are trying to teach them to be fiscally responsible, manage their money well, and live within their means, a Yes vote will not reinforce those ideas.

If you are trying to teach them to be good stewards, a Yes vote will reinforce the idea that you don't need to be responsible with "the little" to be entrusted with more.

If you are trying to teach your children to be considerate of others and respect their elders, a Yes vote again will not reinforce those ideals. Most seniors already have a hard time deciding on whether to eat or buy prescriptions. This referendum will bring them to tougher decisions.

Will your vote today teach your children to be ruled by wants and emotions and value only the shiny and new or will it teach them to base their decisions on facts and the reality of budgets.

Lastly, IF you had to bring a check to the polling place today, made out for the entire amount of the referendum and dated so that the district could take out their yearly allotment in order to cast a YES vote, would you still vote yes?

Today is MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TUESDAY! Go vote! Besides 2 no votes on the referendums, I am writing in Jon Wolff against Bob Ziegler and Cindy Kilkenny against Glen Allgaier.

Please attend the Public Comment session at Brookfield's City hall tonight at 7:45 pm. This will be your final opportunity to speak out against the moving of 2 fire stations to the west. East High School will lose its 1 minute response time.

Post WW2 era buildings = modern construction

WANT TO CONTACT ME ANONYMOUSLY? CLICK HERE

LINKS:Brookfield7 postings Betterbrookfield, Votenoapril3.com


*Source:
Wold Printing Services, Chicago, Il - online muni's
School District of Elmbrook, Waukesha County, Wisconsin Taxable General Obligation Refunding Bonds, posted 01/20/2005: $9,780,000 bonds w/ maturity 2006-2024
"direct, overlapping and underlying bonded indebtedness per capita: $2,798.66"



 

Uncle Matt wants you, even if it means we have to build bigger schools

By Kyle Prast
Monday, Apr 2 2007, 11:58 PM

According to the Elmbrook LINK, “There has never been a greater need than now to recruit all possible resident-student enrollments into our schools.”

I heard that only 30% of the households in the district have school age children. Of that potential pool of students, 25% of them DO NOT attend Elmbrook schools. (This 25% either attend private or other district schools or are homeschooled. If taxes keep rising, it will be more difficult for parents to choose any option other than Elmbrook schools.)

Elmbrook has about 7,000 students in the system now or 75% of the total school age population. I figured that meant the remaining 25% of non-attendees would number about 2333. Elmbrook wants them all to come into the fold.

What is the reasoning behind Elmbrook recruiting each and every one of these potential students? Is it because we think we do such an outstanding job of educating them? Not according to The LINK. It went on to state that we need the higher enrollment totals to add to our numbers, which boosts our state revenue cap. That means we get more money from the state the higher our enrollments are. It is to avoid $1.5M yearly budget shortfalls.

If you recall, that was one of the reasons the majority of the board implemented our 4K program. Elmbrook wanted those new students to give the budget a boost.

So how much do we get for this lucrative business of enrolling a student in our system?

In 2004-05, Elmbrook received $1,701 per full time student. The state average was $5,500. There are some other Federal and Local revenue gains, but seeing as the total cost paid by property tax (us) was $9,480/student ($5,339 above state average) I fail to see how recruiting extra students helps us. (The total cost per student that year was $12,768, which was $1,724 above state average.)

What about those open enrollment transfer students from other school districts or the Chapter 220 students? The district always makes it seem like those students are money makers. In 2005 we had 397 open enrollment students and 317 Chapter 220. How much money does our district receive for these “money maker” students?

Open enrollment students gave us $5,500/student, but the total cost per student is $12,768. That is a $7,268 shortfall the taxpayers must make up*. (There may be some other funding here, but it would not be that much.)

Chapter 220 students bring a better dowry. We receive about $10,000/Chapter 220 student. Remember though, these students tend to be heavy users of special services such as social workers and vice principals for discipline issues. Taxpayers still must make up for the $2,768 shortfall between reimbursement and actual per student cost.

Much like the shop-a-holic racking up credit card debt to gain the free points or offers on their credit card, this kind of enrollment does not make any sense to me. Enrolling a student to gain $1,701, $5,500, or even $10,000 when the actual cost is $12,768 is purely Lucy Ricardo math. (I don’t mean to be picking on Lucy today, but it follows the same logic.)

Now let’s discuss the real cost of recruiting every last student we possibly can from within or without the district.

We have this unprecedented $108.8 million dollar referendum before us. One of the main reasons for it is that the district tells us we are short of classroom space—even though enrollments are declining. Current high school enrollment is 1,413 at Central, and 1,391 at East. (Projections show this number will decrease about 10% by 2011.)
In 2005, JSOnline reported, “At Wednesday's meeting, committee members expressed concerns that continuing to allow an unlimited number of non-resident students into the district would crowd the new high schools.
‘Then we would have to look at whether we need to build bigger high schools to accommodate all the open enrollment students,’ board member Steve Schwei said.”


The total non resident number of students this year is 724. 724? That is more than Swanson or Brookfield El’s maximum capacity. It is also greater than 10% of our own resident student enrollment.

Translating that to the high schools, in a ratio of high school enrollment compared to total enrollment, I estimated that non-resident high school students number about 265. Dividing that between Central and East, and you have 135 for Central and 130 at East. Divide that by 4 grade levels, and it comes to 30 - 34 students per grade level. 30 – 34 students = one classroom (at least).

Some English classes are at 30 students; the chemistry lab had 24 desks and lab stations. If you have a class full every hour, you also need a TEACHER for these students, EVERY HOUR. One reason we are short of classroom space at the high school level is that we have these non resident students. How many excess teachers do we have because of non-resident student enrollments?

Why would the administration, led by Matt Gibson, want to recruit every possible student if this means greater expenses for district taxpayers and shortages of classroom space?

One reader commented, “He’s trying to build a for profit empire out of our wallet! The bigger the empire; the bigger the check.”

Well big empires justify big raises, and we just gave Dr. Matt Gibson a hefty one of $4,881 for a total of $142,230 this year.

I don’t think that is the districts main reason for recruitment. I think it is more the Lucy Ricardo math factor. They just see what they are getting and forget what it costs. Of course it is easier for them to ignore costs when it is not coming out of their pocket.

IT IS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TUESDAY! Go vote!

WANT TO CONTACT ME ANONYMOUSLY? CLICK HERE

LINKS:Brookfield7 postings Betterbrookfield, Votenoapril3.com

*2008 note: The Non-resident student cost is still not known. Much depends on if there was a true vacancy or if that student's presence required splitting the class into two new classes.  


 

Wall of Shame

By Kyle Prast
Saturday, Mar 31 2007, 11:17 PM

Last weekend, I went on the mechanical tour at both high schools. I saw many things that should have been attended to but did not require a referendum to do. Others were items that in other districts would have just been taken care of within their operations budget, like painting door jambs, etc.

The third category would fall into a capitol improvement project during the summer, such as new chemistry cabinetry and counter tops. Nothing I saw was anything that a bit of diligence and a modest increase in budget could not remedy.

Right now I would like to focus on two problems that were just out and out neglect: a hole in the ceiling and holes in the wall. These problems challenge the Elmbrook LINK statement: “While the schools are well maintained within the scope of annual operating budgets...”

I question this statement because both would have been inexpensive and relatively easy to fix.

The first picture is of the ceiling in the girls locker room at Central’s pool. I think it has been like this since I took a mother and child swim class (my son is now 18). It is an access panel for something. The question is why was the ceiling never re-plastered around the frame? This is not a functional problem, just a cosmetic. I could even repair this one!

But these holes in the electric room are a real problem. They are the remaining sleeves from the abandoned oil tank lines which passed through the electrical room at Central. As you can see from the photo, water is seeping in through these holes and collecting on the electrical room floor.

Now most people’s first reaction is that water and electricity don’t mix. Pity the poor electrician that needs to work on or shut off any circuit breakers in there! That is a problem, but it's not the worst problem. According to new standards, electricians are not supposed to work anything "hot" (live).

No, the real problem here is that the humidity is very high in this closed room, and humidity and electrical contacts don’t mix. High humidity causes the contacts in the circuit breakers to oxidize and corrode. This eventually will cause the breaker to fail. Considering how many breakers are in this vicinity and the expense of changing them out, you would think the district would get after this, or at the very least put in a dehumidifier.

This would be a prime example of a very inexpensive repair that the district is ignoring. It does not require a referendum to fix it, just effort.

We had a similar situation in our home. The underground oil tank lines came in through our basement wall and water leaked in around the pipes. My husband dug down with a shovel from the outside, cleaned up the area, and used hydraulic cement to patch the holes.

Presto. No more leak.

Cost? About $10.00 in cement and a bit of sweat equity. That is all it would cost the district too. If the area above that wall is not accessible, it could be patched from the inside with the cement and epoxy.

There is no reason that the district could not fix this either. They still can and save the circuitry. Any responsible property owner would do so.

So why have they been neglected? Seems to me the district is a strange mix of Slum Lord: do as little as possible, combined with a welfare entitlement mentality: why take care of it; the taxpayers will just buy me a new one.

I’m hard pressed to come up with any other explanation for neglecting these simple repairs.

ONLY 2 MORE DAYS UNTIL MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TUESDAY!

WANT TO CONTACT ME ANONYMOUSLY? CLICK HERE

LINKS:Brookfield7 postings Betterbrookfield, Votenoapril3.com



 

The Corridor Report: How wide will they be? We don't know

By Kyle Prast
Saturday, Mar 31 2007, 06:48 PM
Be sure to read the Corridor Report

 

Elmbrook paid for some of Janesville's referendum?

By Kyle Prast
Friday, Mar 30 2007, 08:57 AM
Referendum fever is hitting many school districts these days. Lisa Sink compiled a great chart of area referendums dating from 1988 to 2007 for her article, Elmbrook district casting big net. On it Janesville tops most costly, successful referendum list.

According to the article, “...most school districts with multiple high schools have chosen to spread work for the high schools over several referendums.” This is because it saves the taxpayers money—less money borrowed over a shorter time. But is that what Elmbrook is doing? No. If Janesville can do it all at once, certainly we can too? “Janesville was the only district Elmbrook Schools Superintendent Matt Gibson could cite that has sought large-scale improvements to two high schools at the same time”.

But wait a minute. Comparing Janesville to Elmbrook is not a fair comparison. Elmbrook taxpayers pay more in property tax to support their schools and state schools than Janesville taxpayers do. We are known as a “ ‘Primary Aid District’ due to our large tax base.” Because of that base, Elmbrook sends more money to the state than it receives back in state aid.

For our referendum, Elmbrook residents must pay “dollar for dollar” of all expenses. But according to Bob Borch, “They (Janesville) accounted for receiving 25% of every dollar needed to pay back the bonds as coming from state aid, this lowering the cost to the taxpayer for their borrowing.”

Elmbrook taxpayers also spend more per pupil than many other districts. Janesville gets $6,208 / student, while their property taxes contribute $2,900. Wausau recently passed a large referendum, but they receive $6,147 in state aid / student. Their taxpayers contribute $4,026. Closer to home Greenfield receives $4,317/student and pays $5,855.

What is Elmbrook’s benefit and cost? We receive only $1,701 in state aid, but our taxpayers must pay $9,480!

Do you see why comparing our district to Wausau, Greenfield or Janesville is not a fair comparison?

Coming up next: See why Janesville won the referendum, but lost anyway

ONLY 3 MORE DAYS UNTIL MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TUESDAY! WANT TO CONTACT ME ANONYMOUSLY? CLICK HERE

LINKS:Brookfield7 postings Betterbrookfield, Votenoapril3.com



 

Resident: How much will this cost? Bob Borch: Basically we do not know

By Kyle Prast
Friday, Mar 30 2007, 08:52 AM
Be sure to read this informative posting of Q & A between Bob Borch and an Elmbrook resident. Inquiring minds want to know! Q & A with Bob Borch as the source

 

Fact Sheet 1: Safety and Security-Part 1: The Cameras are coming WITH or WITHOUT the referendum

By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, Mar 28 2007, 10:19 AM

Certainly every parent wants to know their children are safe while at school. The district knows this too and makes it one of their reasons to vote for the referendum.

On Elmbrook’s “Fact” sheet #1, it states: “While it is now standard equipment in most high schools, neither Brookfield Central nor Brookfield East has a closed circuit security television system for monitoring activity in the hallways, common areas, or parking lots and for monitoring access to over 60 outside doors at each school.”

There is one BIG FACT missing from this sheet. The FACT that next year, the cameras will be installed regardless of referendum passage. Principal LaBonte told us this little known fact when I toured Central last month.

Here is another FACT you may be interested in. Other area schools have been in the process of getting their cameras installed for a few years now, working their way, school by school through their districts--without a referendum.


Time to dispel another fallacy: These cameras are not to protect against Stranger Danger or terrorist intrusion. I think when most people hear the words security system or closed circuit security cameras they immediately conjure up the image of the security checkpoint at the Pentagon!

THIS is NOT what these cameras are for. These cameras are primarily to monitor STUDENT activity, not STRANGER activity.


A recent Brookfieldnow article stated, “In a time when many high schools around the nation have dealt with incidents of school violence, a closed-circuit security television system is necessary to monitor activity in the hallways, common areas and parking lots, according to principals.”


Remember that most high school violence is caused by students, not strangers. The cameras record motion in the hallways or wherever they are mounted, and that information is stored for future use. As a rule, it is not monitored continually during the day as we would think of a closed circuit television system. It is only there if there is an incident, they can see who was involved.


While on the mechanical tour of Central, the guide told us that one of the stairways in the 3 story addition was seldom used. I asked why, since I had heard the other stairways were so crowded. He hesitated, then said, they were too isolated and things happened in the stairwells.

Whether we are talking hanky-panky or bullying or drug deals, I don’t know. I do know going back to the concept of a hall monitor might help. In any event, this is not a STRANGER problem; it is a STUDENT problem.


The real question is: Why has Elmbrook neglected this “need” until now?

Could it be the same reason they have neglected other standard maintenance issues? They are trying to present a needier picture of our high schools than there really is, and in the case of security cameras, they will be installed next year—even without the referendum.


ONLY 5 MORE DAYS UNTIL MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TUESDAY!

WANT TO CONTACT ME ANONYMOUSLY? CLICK HERE


LINKS:Brookfield7 postings Betterbrookfield, Votenoapril3.com

 

And now, a word from our sponsor, your Elmbrook School District

By Kyle Prast
Wednesday, Mar 28 2007, 12:52 AM
When I was on the mechanical tour last weekend, I did watch the “informative” video playing in the lobby. (I cannot call it unbiased.) I kept waiting for the commercial to break in.... (Read this in your best announcer voice.)

...And now a word from our sponsor, your Elmbrook School District.

...They brought you referendum, after referendum, after referendum, after referendum, from 1991 to 1995, until the 5th one for Swanson finally passed.

...The ones who brought you the Swanson Swap that you only found out about before the fact because of a leak to the press.

...The same gang who, after the community spoke out loud and clear to save Swanson, tried to change our school district from a Unified to a Consolidated School District so they wouldn’t need public permission to sell school property ever again. (That measure failed.)

...The same group who purposely neglected maintaining our high schools for at least the past 6 years and then have the nerve to whine about our school’s condition. (This is solvable.)

...Don’t forget our board’s approval of that “needed” 4K program, overriding the publics' displeasure of adding another $67 to our tax bills. It required dipping into our reserves to implement. (It still has some openings, and they said it was such a need?)

...And, last but not least, don’t forget my favorite: the $2.5 million dollar tax bite (defeasance) they took out of your wallet last year on your 2006 property tax bill. NOT TO PAY DOWN THE DEBT, but to invest!

When we voted in 2000 for the 2 new grade schools, we approved that referendum for $17,900,000 not an additional pre funding investment scheme.

Anyway, I thought you should remember who the SPONSOR is of this referendum.

Is it a name you can trust?

ONLY 5 MORE DAYS UNTIL MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TUESDAY!

WANT TO CONTACT ME ANONYMOUSLY? CLICK HERE

LINKS:Brookfield7 postings Betterbrookfield, Votenoapril3.com

 

Vote Yes postcard: I would give it a F for accuracy!

By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, Mar 27 2007, 10:14 AM
Someone gave me their Vote Yes postcard yesterday, so I could take a look at it. (I did not receive one because I do not have children in the district.)

The first thing I noticed was that it was an appeal to the emotions. It asks: ...if you would FEEL compelled to help. It then portrays a list of below average and failing grades for various components in the high schools.

I don’t know what they based these grades on. To me a failing grade would mean it does not meet minimal standards—that it does not function at a reasonable expectation. Example: Mechanical Systems: “F” to me would mean we consistently have interrupted or inadequate service for heat, lights, water, electricity, etc. Anyway, that is their opinion; these grades are not based on facts. The school district's own literature contradicts those bad grades, stating that the schools have been "well maintained" (within operating budgets).

But this is one FACT they got WRONG: No opinion, it is simply incorrect.
And it's in regard to a major component: the price.


They state that the COST is roughly 50 cents a day.

THAT IS NOT TRUE!

THE REAL COST IS ROUGHLY 94 CENTS A DAY.

I added up all of the columns on the district’s cost calculator for referendum question #1 and #2, and it totaled $6,837.65 for an average Brookfield home of $335,000. (That is the number the district has been using, if you would add Elm Grove’s average home value into the mix, that number would be higher).

The postcard also listed various other problems below the report card that I don’t believe are accurate. Hopefully I will address them in a future piece.

I realize the question of the high school referendums is something that can be looked at from both sides: the proverbial water glass half full or empty. BUT one must portray the fact of the glass’ contents accurately or the merit of the argument does not hold water!

ONLY 7 MORE DAYS UNTIL MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TUESDAY!

WANT TO CONTACT ME ANONYMOUSLY? CLICK HERE

LINKS:Brookfield7 postings Betterbrookfield, Votenoapril3.com


 

Signs of the times: What's wrong with this picture? (Updated)

By Kyle Prast
Tuesday, Mar 27 2007, 10:05 AM
I received a bit more information about Signs of the times: What's wrong with this picture? from the police department. All signs must be 10 feet from the roadway, and if you have a complaint, you must have the address when calling it into the police department. Example: The Speedway at 18815 W. Bluemound Rd. Signs are 2 on Bluemound and are too close to street edge. (I also wonder if the Yes person obtained permission from the owner to post their signs.)

There is a stipulation that the sign must be in good condition. Some of the signs I have seen are flopping off the wires.

 
More Posts Next page »