Monday, January 25, 2010

Squeezing in...

The Herald-Independent complained about the lack of space in the Nichols Board room during our last meeting, at this time I don't know if there is a plan to fix the problem for Wednesday's meeting.

Items of note:

IX. New Business
B. Report on Second Friday in January Enrollment Count (10 Min)

Enrollment edged up again between September and January.

E. Discussion and Possible Approval of Preliminary Notice of Non-Renewal of Administrator
Contracts – Craig Gerlach (5 Min.)

Admin contracts automatically roll over at the end of January unless we issue Notice of Non-Renewal.  In order to keep our budget options open we will need to issue notices.

F. Discussion of Use of Nichols School Property (15 Min)

What direction should we take with the Nichols property?  IMHO this is a valuable piece of real estate that should be on the tax rolls and working for the economy of our district.  (P.S. any sale of district property requires approval of the electorate, the board doesn't have authority.)

X. Unfinished Business


A. Discussion and Possible Approval of Recommendation of Report on 4K-8 Grade
Configuration (10 Min)

The 4k-8 report generated very little discussion at our last meeting, the costs pretty much spoke for themselves. 

B. Discussion of Additional Recommendations on the Ad Hoc Committee to Study Grade
Configuration for Grades 4K-8 (45 Min)

C. Discussion of Budget Reduction Proposals & Hearing Schedule

More budget cutting discussions.  We should have the results from the administration survey collated for our review.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

Combine Maywood and Winnequah beginning in the fall. It is a fiscally responsible move and I have heard that teachers and staff at both buildings support the idea.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the above idea.
I am ok with my children going to a K-6 school, and would rather have them in a bigger building then a bigger class (due to staff cuts.
The merger would knock off a quarter of what you're short, and could be reversed pretty easily if enrollment increased and/or state funding increased.
I have not spoken to staff, and can't speak for them, but as a parent of kids who would be affected, I support it.

Anonymous said...

Did the 4K-8 study answer the question of what will be needed when the Monona school age population meets or exceeds the upper end of the enrollment projections? All the graphs in the report on the district web site show a trend that clearly bottomed and is sharply turning upward for enrollment in Monona. Will consolidation soon require an expansion within the next decade? It is short-sighted to consolidate when larger costs may result in just a few years as Monona school age children increase in numbers, which is a clear trend at the moment on paper and visible within the community. We have cut enough schools in Monona and this has to stop being held over our heads.

Anonymous said...

Monona has plenty of room to grow. Winnequah could handle Maywood and another 50 kids or so. If that got filled, Winnequah and Maywood together could handle 250 more kids (300 more then now). And if those got filled, Nichols could handle another 200 (500 extra kids) or so (almost double the current 4k-6 population).
No one is saying tear down the buildings so I don't see what the larger costs would be. The district could easily save money now, and reopen buildings if we get more kids.

Anonymous said...

Not to mention.... the consolidation would mean that a principal, an art teacher, a librarian, and a bunch of other aids and stuff would not have to travel between two rooms in two schools-think about your job split between two offices. Bummer.

Anonymous said...

Nichols was closed and then reopened. I live in Monona and have great affection for Maywood, but teachers are more important than buildings. Close Maywood and save staff positions.

Anonymous said...

I, too,live in Monona and support joining Maywood and Winnequah. Keep the property, it is likely to be needed again. Closing even for a few years saves hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Anonymous said...

Are you gonna follow Doug Wood's lead and not allow negative, anonymous comments about candidates?

Anonymous said...

Why shouldn't there be public discussion about candidates negative attributes?

Anonymous said...

Say-where is your survey and the other members of the board?

Peter Sobol said...

I will continue to enforce my rules, negative anonymous comments should be based on verifiable public information: "I don't like that X voted for Y at meeting Z" is OK, "I heard that X thinks Y about Z" is not. Negative comments based on non public information will require identification and/or verification. I will invite candidates to respond to any negative comments in this space.

I DO think it is important to hear and discuss the negatives (about me and anyone else). But since I don't have the time to verify identities I don't think there is a point to restricting anonymous comments in general as an internet identity can be easily faked.