There is no school on Wednesday, so this week's board meeting was moved from Wednesday to Tuesday (11/24) evening.
Items of note on the agenda:
IX. New Business
B. PMA Five-Year Budget Forecast Model Presentation (30 min)
-This is probably the most difficult situation we are facing. Most people don't know that for the last several years the PMA budget forecast shows a significant structural budget deficit that starts to increase by nearly a million dollars a year by 2011. The problem has been simple: state revenue caps and the funding formula limit the annual increase in revenue to less than 2%, while the QEO results in average annual increases in personnel costs (80% of the budget) of about 4.5%. The difference between revenue and expenses -more than 2%/year- will quickly start adding up.
Of course the QEO law was recently repealed, but I doubt that will result in reductions in costs that will bridge the gap, nor should it.
There isn't any good news in this, but the vast majority of school districts in the state are facing the same problem. We are fortunate that our facilities are in very good shape compared to other districts, with little defered maintenance or significant pending infrastructure requirements. Couple that with our energy reducing efforts and a healthy budget reserved and MGSD is probably in better shape to weather the coming years than the vast majority of Wisconsin districts.
C. Discussion of Revised Policy #425-Open Enrollment (and Rule #452-Open
Enrollment Procedure) (20 min)
- The concern here relates to establishing criteria for refusing OE students. State law requires us to take OE students provided that there is sufficient space, but how is "space" defined? Are we allowed to turn down students because we won't be able to accommodate them after a few years in the next school?
XI. Future Agenda Items and Meetings
A. December 22 - Report of 4K-8 Grade Configuration in Each Community Study
At the December meeting we will hear the report from the administration regarding the results of the -4k-8 study. This study is primarily focused on the costs required to implement 4k-8 in each community, rather than the environmental or education benefits.
B. Gifted and Talented Policy
- Jill List asked that we review this policy because of parent concerns. One of the general trends under NCLB (no child left behind law) is for districts to focus attention on the lower performing students, often shifting resources from higher performing students. I believe one of the biggest problem with NCLB is that it sets a single status goal, rather than growth or averages. To meet AYP requirements districts need to just get an increasing number of students over a fixed bar, there is no incentive to expend energy on those students who are comfortably over it or who are too far below to have a reasonable chance of making it. I also think that we have an obligation to challenge every student to their fullest potential, regardless of their level of proficiency.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
about the open enrollment policy, is there a way to find out what type of resources a certain student will need before entering our district? Would that student be placed in a regular classroom with minimal support or would this child need special help or other support that would "cost more" than we are "making" on having them in our district? To me, open enrollment is about money. To me it is to fill a grade up so that we can get their "chunk" of money allotted to them by the state. I see no other reason to have it. It allows maybe larger offerings at upper levels and it "makes the district money" at the lower levels where it costs less to educate students. If there are kids entering our district that are "expensive" to educate, is there a way to turn them away?
Ny understanding is that districts are NOT allowed to deny OE students with special needs due to cost considerations provided the district has space and provides the services that student requires. This is similar to the requirements for a general population student, although the "space" requirement would refer to the special education capacity.
I wouldn't underestimate the benefits of these extra students, at all levels. I think they allow us to offer programming in the upper grades and support service in the lower grades that we wouldn't otherwise have the critical mass to do. I also believe open enrollment exposes our communities to families which has a positive impact all around.
Ah, but Peter, open enrollment as a concept has a major flaw - and that is as a practical matter, it is only open to families who have the means to transport their child to another school district. For many lower income and single parent families, this is not financially or logistically possible. It creates an uneven playground in public education where folks of means have choice while underprivileged families do not. I remain somewhat uneasy with the situation in a global sense although I understand the district must comply with the law.
MP
It has another problem in that it allows some to live in low tax districts but benefit from the offerings of a nearby high tax district - in the long run this will impoverish both districts!
At this point, I am not sure that I want a k-8 in monona unless it saves money.
I am much more worried about the high numbers of students in classes. My child's class is over the limit that is recommended and it bugs me that next year it will just get worse.
Anon,
Please list your concerns for NOT wanting K-8 in Monona. This ought to be good.
I live in Monona and voted to build GD believing that it would offer great opportunities for all of the district's middle school kids (I don't have kids affected). Will Winnequah be remodeled to offer the same specs? If not, we are creating an unequal playing ground for Monona kids entering MG. Technology, athletics, music...will Monona kids be prepared for MG given a "smaller" middle school environment. I still believe our district's strength comes from both communities coming together, at the middle school level.
In 2005 the voters overwhelming rejected the option for k-8 in each community. The board has an obligation to listen to the community when their will is expressed so clearly.
It is hard to believe that the board is even considering K-8 in each community when it was so overwhelmingly rejected in a referendum vote within the last 10 years- (7 years?) ridiculous!
And yes, Monona kids will not have the access to educational opprotunities that GDS kids have simply by the fact of the sheer numbers- already true for the 6th graders- they don't get the chance to sing/play instruments in a larger group, they don't get the intermural athletic opprotunities, they don't get the wide range of afterschool clubs,etc offered at GDS. If 6th grade remains a middle school grade, then they should all be together. If not, then the idea that Monona kids can have equal access to programming in a tiny little middle school is silly. Not to mention the cost of all those driving teachers. And for what? Because once again, Monona parents fear the bus. So silly!
I would have to agree with the above that the k-8 is not just in Monona but both communities. I see advantages to both ways to have the k-8 and k-6 in each community. Have we considered pushing to have 6th grade to be grade school curriculum rather than middle school curriculum to save $$. No matte what is decided, I just wish we could make a decision and be done...
But my question is if Monona moves out to GD...is there room for them? It is my impression that GD is at capacity as is...
my child's teacher already admitted that she is having trouble getting to know each student due to the high enrollment in her class currently. I dread that class sizes are on the rise.
"But my question is if Monona moves out to GD...is there room for them? It is my impression that GD is at capacity as is..."
Glacial Drumlin is under capacity. Repeat: UNDER CAPACITY.
GD's capacity is 750 students. GD's enrollment this fall is 719 students. See "enrollment information" link on the front page of the MG school district website.
Simple math -- based on students currently enrolled in the district who will move into (and out of) GD in the next few years -- shows GD will continue to be UNDER CAPACITY for the next several years.
2010-11: GD capacity -- 750; GD enrollment -- 740.
2011-12: GD capacity -- 750; GD enrollment -- 724.
2012-13: GD capacity -- 750; GD enrollment -- 738.
Is under when figure that we are talking about K, who need specific types of faciliites.
I will try again is it under when you calculate that a former middle school needs different types of rooms then an el school?
"I will try again is it under when you calculate that a former middle school needs different types of rooms then an el school?"
Try one more time -- punctuation and spelling out words is helpful.
Post a Comment