Going the distance

Wednesday night the Business Services committee passed a recommendation to the board to approve the Guaranteed Performance Contract with McKinstry. This will provide energy upgrades that would pay for themselves in all district buildings except Maywood and Nichols. Either of these buildings could be readily added to the contract through a change order process pending the findings of the Ad Hoc grade configuration committee.

Although I thought Maywood should be included there was an expressed desire to keep the contract smaller on the part of several of the participants in the discussion. I felt it was more important to move ahead now with the smaller proposal than wait to develop concensus for a more aggresive approach. As we gain experience and comfort with this process we will probably upsize it to take full advantage of the savings it provides.


The committee also approved some changes to straighten out the busing situation in Cottage Grove which currently has longer travel and wait times than necessary. The administrations recommendations essentially put all the students at Glacial Drumlin in the same transportation scheme. We will no longer have the 5th graders picked up early, taken to CG elementary before going home. To accommodate this change 1/2 hour of supervision is added at the end of the day for 5th graders who are bused and the walk zones for 5th through 8th grades are made equivalent. The end of day supervision is offset by a reduction in supervision in the morning as some of these kids now arrive very early.

The biggest impact of this proposal will be a reduction in the wait times at CG elementary- the younger kids should be getting home as much as 20 minutes earlier - and they won't be waiting around after school. On the down side more the fifth graders in the Village north of BB and west of N will be walking. This is the same area where the 6th-8th grade students walk now. The recommendation trades increased walk zones for about 40 5th graders against decreased transport and wait times for 4k-4 students and modest reductions in district transportation costs.

This week in meetings part 2)

The Ad Hoc Grade Configuration Committee will meet Tuesday the 24th at 6pm in the District Office Board room in Nichols. The agenda includes:

IV. Review Committee Charge
V. Review & Define Procedures
VI. Discuss Building Capacity
VII. Discuss Applied Population Projections
VIII. Review and Define Options
IX. Discuss Status of Committee and Future Direction

This week in meetings part 1)

Wed 5pm: Business Services Committee meeting. Items of note:

V) Energy Performance contract with McKinstry. Once more into the breach.

VI) 2009-10 budget update and preliminary budget proposal: This will be the first detailed look at the proposed budget reductions for next year. This is a discussion only, nothing will be approved

VII) Approval of district transportation bids: Bus service (currently provided by Badger Bus) is run with 5 year contracts. The current contract ends this year and we have solicited bids for the next 5 years. We will also make a recommendation concerning continued district operation of routes in Cottage Grove or if those should also be contracted.

VIII) School start and end times: To reduce transportation costs we will discuss a proposal to adjust the bell times for the CG 5th graders.

IX) Walk Zones: Change the 5th grade walk zones to match the 6th grade walk zones district wide. Currently siblings in the same building might be in the situation where the 5th grader is bused while the 6th grader walks.

Doyle's budget

Doyle's budget today had a suprising 3.9% increase in state aids for schools over 2 years. This doesn't make us whole, but it is better than expected. Of course this has to get through the legislature, so this chicken shouldn't be counted yet.

The budget proposal also repeals the QEO (qualified economic offer). The QEO law dictates that a school district can avoid arbitration by making a total compensation offer to the teacher's union that is an increase in excess of 3.8%/year. The QEO law is designed to hold down property taxes by holding down the increases in teacher salaries, and it does, but it also places an effective floor on annual increases. Since the QEO law went into effect no district has settled for less than 3.8%. My concern is that the QEO was part of the total funding system which includes the revenue caps. To throw out one part without reworking the entire system might be problematic.

Also the budget will require 3 years of math and science to graduate from high school. Currently we only require 2 years - I think this is a move in the right direction.

http://www.doa.state.wi.us/debf/execbudget.asp

Wednesday Committee Meetings

The Personel & Policy Committee meets at 6 and the Curriculum Committee meets at 7:15.

The Curriculum Committee will be hearing several science related subjects, including an our science assesment data, UW admissions requirements and standards, and an overview of the district's science offerings at the high school.

Vote Tomorrow?!

Yes, tomorrow is the spring primary, and there is one statewide race on the ballot. There are five candidates in the race for Superintendent of Public Instruction, the primary tomorrow will narrow the field to two. The AP has this take on the position:

While past state superintendents have used the position to take on the policies of the governor, the title carries with it very little true power. It is largely administrative, responsible for running the agency that provides state and federal aid to public schools, and offering guidance to teachers and administrators.

However, the superintendent can use the position to advocate for change and push education policies that could influence decisions made by the Legislature and governor.

At its best the Superintedent can be an effective administrator and a vocal and visible advocate for policy.

I won't endorse anyone here, you can find a brief run-down on the candidates here: http://www.jsonline.com/news/education/39296147.html

Budget outlook

At last Wednesday's BS Committee meeting we were presented with 3 PMA budget models based on assumptions of state increases in the revenue cap of $275/student (Last year's number), 50% of that and 0. For these cases the budget deficit ranges from 0.7 to 1.3 million dollars for the district in 2009-10 budget year. Further, Gov. Doyle has indicated that we shouldn't expect any increases in state aids so any increases in spending under the revenue cap would have to born by the local property taxpayer, an unpalatable option given the current economy.

So one way or another there is going to be a substantial hole in the budget.

What should we do about it? Craig has started the process by asking the staff to bring forward suggestions for places to cut. The administration will go through the various options and prioritize them then bring them to the board for discussion.

Approximately 80% of the district's spending goes into salaries and benefits which means that any significant savings can only be achieved at the cost of reducing staff. I am loathe to see anyone layed-off in the current economy, so I hope that staff reductions can be minimized. Of course some savings can be found in other areas but there just isn't that much there to begin with.

I can't speak for the board or administration, but personally I would choose to focus on preserving efforts to improve core academic achievement. I've been in organizations that try to save money by trimming a little bit out of everything, but this is a quick road to mediocrity where nothing is done well. We should admit we can't do everything, pick the things we want to do and provide the resources to do them well.