Elmbrook may tap reserves for projects tonight after the Annual Meeting at 7pm*, at Brookfield El. What are the projects? The HVAC replacement, including air conditioning, at Pilgrim Park Middle School and some SmartBoards for some elementary schools. (*Actually, the budget hearing is at 7pm, the Annual Meeting is at 8pm.)

In an era of rising energy prices, I just cannot justify the cost to convert to and operate air conditioning our schools. I know the majority of Elmbrook voters disagreed with me on that since they just approved the $62+ million dollar referendum for the high schools--a significant portion going toward the air conditioning conversion and air conditioning gym areas. It still seems like a waste of tax dollars to me.

The commercials run by WE energies stating that Wisconsin pays 7% less than the national average for electric costs don't make me feel better about these HVAC decisions. My dad had a colorful saying about being better than the average, he would say, "He's/it's a little better than the average, but the average ain't so good!" Telling me I pay 7% less does little to ease the pain that occurs every time I look at my utility bill. Despite our efforts to cut back, the price keeps going up.

I think we all know that bigger utility bills are the shape of things to come. So why switch to a system that commits us to those higher bills now? It is hardly like money is growing on trees.

We have been told by the district that Elmbrook faces a $1 - 1.5 million dollar shortfall each year because of declining enrollments. Plus, there is that unfunded retirement liability lurking in the near future.

The district may try to sell the idea of air conditioning costs as being affordable. I seem to remember that they said the utility costs per square foot for Brookfield El. and Dixon actually went down compared to the old school buildings. Of course that was the per square foot cost.

Considering that the old schools probably still had the very inefficient florescent lighting and ballasts that use about a third more* electricity than the newer models, and the Univent valves all probably leaked (heating), it makes perfect sense that the per square foot cost went down in the new building. As it stands now, we are not saving the money from the increased efficiency in those schools but spending the savings on air conditioning.

The cost estimate to do install the air conditioning at Pilgrim is $1 million dollars. This is on top of the $3 mil. for boiler upgrades/replacements. One thing I learned from speaking with an expert in the HVAC field is that even if they can use the same pipes for the cold water as they do for the hot water heat, those pipes still need to be insulated. That means that each wall and ceiling the pipes run through need to be opened to install the insulation. Without insulation, the pipes sweat and drip into the walls and ceilings causing mold and damage. 

If it were my home, I would put the money into windows that opened from the top and bottom. That way, hot air off the ceiling vents out, and cooler outside air comes in from the bottom. I would install ceiling fans in most rooms and exhaust fans in the rooms that over heat.

For the few days that we have hot weather while school is still in session, I think proper ventilation would suffice. But then, those improvements would be because I was spending MY money, not someone else's (taxpayers).

We will see what this board does with this air conditioning question. Some on the board members are fiscally more responsible. Why, I heard Glen Allgaier ask at the budget intro meeting if we were going to use any of the 4K budget windfall to help offset some of our coming debt. (Good idea.) I think the answer was, No.

*Sorry, I cannot find my notes, but I think 1/3 is pretty close to correct. If I find my notes, I will post a correction.  

Click here to sign the DRILL HERE. DRILL NOW. PAY LESS.  domestic drilling petition and see the latest links to related oil news (updated every day).

Drill Here just reached the 1 million mark. The goal is 3 million signatures by the Democratic and Republican Conventions. 

Links:

The Commission OKs plans for Ruby Farms site.  What I find so frustrating with our Plan Commission is that they grant PDDs and project proposals so easily. Oh, they raise all sorts of questions and concerns, but then vote as if with one "Aye."

Tuesday's meeting was interesting. There were a lot of points the mayor, AVS Development (VK), and commissioners were careful to make. These are not direct quotes, just my impression of the statements.  Watch cable broadcast for exact words:

Mayor makes a point of asking Ajay of AVS something about the amount of runoff water after development vs. before development.

Ajay: Considering the storms this weekend, there will be questions about storm water. We are meeting and exceeding ordinances.

Mayor: You're going to reduce current runoff?

Ajay: Yes,  AVS will sell construction ready pads [to other developers]. We, [AVS] are not requesting public assistance for storm water [or parking structures.]

In other words, no TID district to AVS. More details about what Percheron Square will include. Plans include 1/2 million sq. ft. in office space and parking structure buildings along with 210 condos, retail, an 126 unit extended stay hotel, fitness center, 80 resident assisted living, and Ruby farmsted.(Since Mrs. Ruby still lives there, I don't think they had much of a choice.)

More talk about how much tax base Percheron would add to Brookfield--estimated at $250 million.

Mayor questions Ajay about the office space.

Mayor: Our plan called for 1 million square feet in office space and you are saying less? 

The neighborhood plan did not have all the retail in it that Percheron Square has (852,000 sq. ft?).

Ajay: Yes, our office space was based on [5] parking decks, with that we get 420,000. With no decks, surface parking will cause office space to go down about 1/2.

 Mayor: You're not asking for any TID money for decks?

I think Ajay had to clarify this. The other developer could ask for TID to keep the decks and thus keep all office space of 420,000 of the freestanding office space, not the retail/office mix along Bluemound. 

The subject of connectivity came up several times. Approval based on Patrick Blvd. connecting to Percheron Square does not seem to be a major issue. (Patrick Blvd. extension runs through the neighboring DNR designated wetlands.)

Jennifer Donze raised some good points.

Donze: One of the things I feel is important to plan is the connection to office parks to the west. If we wait for DNR approval after plan [approval] that keeps us from other alternatives. I would request the permit to the DNR prior to the public hearing. 

She also brought up the narrow feel of Percheron Square Drive, a north south internal connection road between the tall office buildings.

Donze: 29 feet back to back is too narrow.

Mayor: "Narrower roads serve as traffic calming."  We have school on the other side, a narrower road puts drivers on notice that this is not a cut through, but a definite purpose.

Is that the same mayor who did not care that the Calhoun south neighborhood is now constructing a roadway the size of some highways cutting through it? 

Mark Nelson brought up this point and even said that other plans were denied because there were not other road connections within.

Mark Nelson: The dominoes needed to fall no matter who developed it. The one domino that is essential is the Patrick Blvd. We've stopped entire subdivisions because of too many culdusacs. We're lessening our standards without knowing what we can do with Patrick Blvd. 

The other domino is the Ruby and Swanson Swap. It seems to me those dominoes aren't going to fall in place right now. If we approve this, when can Mark Nelson step forward and say, Let's reduce buildings and heights

More work needs to be done to get it right.  

I heartily agree.  

Original plans of having Ruby Lane extended into the project have been scrapped. We were told that Elmbrook is not interested in any kind of playfield swap.

Jennifer Donze wished the future Ruby Lane extension would stay on the map.

Donze: There could be some time in the future that the school is no longer there. Why not keep it on the map for future use the city could not foresee? Sometimes plans aren't realized for 50 years.

Ertl fielded that one.

Ertl: School district lands are owned and controlled by the district... Matt Gibson was keen on the idea that the entire project was planned without needing school land.    

 Later Gary Mahkorn assured all that Swanson was off the table.

Mahkorn: I support taking Ruby Lane as a good will gesture to the School District off the map. It is an honorable gesture. I have a hard time believing Swanson will ever move. [Reference to I was at that Town Hall meeting with all the people.]

Why does that make me not feel assured? 

Talk of the poor economic climate and how this project was coming in not asking for TID money. Remember though, it is AVS not asking for TID money. There still could be a request for TID help for the parking structures. (Parking structures cost $15-16,000 each vs. surface parking at $2,000.)

This project is over the current FAR zoning of 30%. Of course the Plan Commission is salivating at the proposed $250 million increase to our tax base, so we know they will approve the PDD. I always ask myself, of that $250 mil, how much will it cost taxpayers in increased city services? Adding that much retail, office, and residential is bound to increase demand on fire, police, schools, and infrastructure, and add to traffic congestion. Plus, Brookfield does not have unlimited water supplies and certainly our sewer capacity does not seem to have excess capacity either.

There finally was some real clarification about the storm water. The Mayor again asked something about the water flow. 

Mayor: The water flow, once they do their grading it will decrease the amount?

Jeff  Chase: The devil is in the details. I haven't reviewed their plan yet, I have no reason to doubt their presentation.

Someone mentioned a standard of 120 ft/second. They propose 98 feet/second. (Sorry, I don't know if it was Chase or the next speaker.)

Then some "Expert" from the project stepped up to the podium. I think he felt he had to clarify.

Expert: The PEAK runoff rate, that is down 20%, not the total.

Jennifer Donze pipes up to help the mayor (and me) understand.

 Donze: They are slowing it down.

Bottom line is, after all the questions and doubts expressed, Gary Mahkorn makes his usual pronouncement...

Mahkorn: We're being asked to approve a PDD general plan, we're not committing to anything right now. Mark and Jennifer's issues ...[all the detail isn't there, but it doesn't need to be there.] 

We all knew someday Ruby Farm would be developed. I am prepared to approve the request tonight. All the other tough questions will be answered down the road. 

And with that, they all voted, AYE. 

Why is it whenever I hear "We aren't committing to anything now" later on, it seems, nothing can be changed? 

Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for  Monday, July 15th's Plan Commission meeting.

Links:

This may surprise you a bit, but I am truly sorry to see Andy Smith go. Although he sometimes put the "ick" in public relations*, I was glad he was the Director of Communications for Elmbrook.

Think about it. Why would I want a champion schmooze-master in that role? You know, someone who could smooth the waters or remove all ire or fear from an agitated parent or taxpayer when maybe those emotions were warranted?

Seriously, at times Andy could be helpful and for that I am thankful. In person he was always polite and cordial.

I do wish him well in his future role. 

*That was a line from the Pixar movie, Monsters Inc. Mike said it about Roz the "woman" who always nagged at Mike, Did you file your paperwork?

Links:

I admit it. I was surprised when Elmbrook's $62 million dollar referendum passed last April 1st. Usually, it takes 3 referendum tries before one will pass.

In my opinion, Elmbrook's referendum broke ranks and passed on the second try because of 3 reasons. One, it was held during a spring election (lower voter turnout) rather than a November presidential election (higher voter turnout), and two, there was virtually no get out the vote campaign from those opposed. (The third reason I call the secret weapon*, the HSST.  Voters really trusted that HSST committee theoretically made up of both "No and Yes" voters. But this third reason does not apply to this posting.)

Some might say, well, our 2007 referendum failed by a very high percentage. That one was also held in a lower voter turnout spring election too. True, but those opposed to that $108 million 2007 referendum leafleted nearly the entire Elmbrook school district with information as to why it was not a good plan. That did not happen in spring of 2008.

Why wasn't there an organized opposition? Fatigue. Those who worked hard to defeat the 2007 referendum were still too burned out from the last go round to muster much of a fight.

Why am I talking about this water over the dam now? Because Germantown's school board is sending their voters this coming November the very same referendum their residents defeated last April 1st! (H/T Jay Weber @ 7:35 am)

The Journal Sentinel's Mike Nichols wrote, Germantown School Board bucks voters. In that article, he reports how the Germantown board isn't even bothering to reduce and refine their April 2008 $16.5 million referendum. They are just sending the very same thing to voters again this fall.

"School boards do this sort of thing frequently. A referendum fails so they wait a little while, cut a little bit out and try again. And again. And again. Until the "no' voters get tired, or move.

"Germantown is taking it a step further. It's not waiting a little while, and it is not cutting.

Considering there are only so many pro referendum votes out there and there will be a larger voter turnout this November, it is hard to believe it will pass. Evidentially, the same thing happened in Hartford last November and this spring. Voters there defeated the referendum both times.

It seems unlikely Germantown's referendum will pass in November, but there aught to be a law against this!

Taxpayers need and deserve a break from this constant whining for more money from their school districts.

Jay Weber suggested this morning that a state law be made that would prohibit a school district from throwing referendum after referendum at their taxpayer base. A 2 to 3 year moratorium between referendums at least would be welcome. (He has mentioned this before.)

If districts knew they would have to wait for 2 years before they came at their taxpayers again, maybe, just maybe, they would present a more thought out and practical plan. Elmbrook's 2008 plan was not well thought out. For one, they budgeted for HVAC improvements before all of the condition reports were known.

While Elmbrook taxpayers know what they are in for now for the next 20 years (theoretically, we are nearly to the end of our referendums our district tells us), keep in mind many referendums are partially financed through the state. Remember Elmbrook paid for some of Janesville's referendum?

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.”

School districts should be prohibited from bombarding their taxpayers with repeated referendums. It would give taxpayers a breather in between referendum pleas, and that would be a breath of fresh air!

* The secret weapon, the HSST, made up of "No and Yes" voters, I think this was the main reason Elmbrook got voters to bite on their 2nd referendum try. Many people cited the reason they voted yes this time was that they trusted the opinion of that group's assessment of our needs. Many voters, for example, did not know they were voting for air conditioning both schools, including the gyms, or that the team started with the premise that new gymnasiums would be included. Members of the 2007 opposition expressed quiet doubts that the 3 No voters included on the HSST team were really No voters.

Links:

I attended the Human Growth and Development (Sex Ed.) work session Tuesday night. Several of the HG&D parent committee members were in the audience along with some interested parents. 

It was great to see many of our board members boldly standing up for the rights of the parent members of the HG&D committee as well as their own right to review and approve of specific lesson plans and materials used for Elmbrook's Sex Education program.

On a minor note, Glen Allgaier questioned the change in terms from STD (sexually transmitted disease) to STI (sexually transmitted infection). He said that the word "disease" caught his attention more than "infection." I would agree with that. Disease seems more detrimental than the term infection, especially considering some of these "infections" are fatal or incurable. The change from STD to STI was not made by Elmbrook, but was a change made by the CDC, I believe. (Update: See comment below from Cheri who notes that CDC still uses STD. Anyone know why we changed to STI?)

Another question about terminology that keeps cropping up is, what is meant by "curriculum?" This becomes important when discussing who is responsible for approving curriculum. Are we talking outcomes/general topics or actual teaching materials/lesson plans?

Dave Marcello said he would be in favor of getting curriculum in place, not outcomes. Outcomes is fuzzy.

Tom Gehl noted that it may be semantics, with curriculum, I conjure films, lesson plans, etc. 

Later in the meeting, Glen Allgaier suggested that they should just drop the word curriculum all together and just talk lesson plans and outcomes.

I would agree, because then everyone would know exactly what was being decided on. Are we agreeing to just the general topics of what is to be taught (outcomes)? or are we talking about the exact lesson plans and materials used to teach that topic?

If you remember, this was brought up before. Eileen Depka and Dr. Stewart say curriculum is the collective word for the total of individual outcomes. But State Statute 118.019 does state, "...nothing in the law prevents the [HG&D] committee from actually writing and developing lessons or a curriculum, for that matter." It later refers to "curriculum (lessons)" in their instructions.

Curriculum review is one area the HG&D committee does not agree on:

12 of the committee agreed: I believe that the HG&D Advisory Committee should review and approve all outcomes and Certified faculty should create the lessons. Grade Level parents (2 or more) should review the lessons and provide recommendations prior to adoption. Parents can review any lesson before their student participates in the class. (Current practice)*

5 of the committee agreed: I believe that the HG&D Advisory Committee should review and approve all outcomes and all lessons. Parents can review any lesson before their student participates in the class. 

*My note: It may be current practice in principle, but not in reality. At the last meeting we were told by the Pilgrim Park Principal that the binders were not available for parental perusal.  

So 5 of the HG&D committee wish a greater role in reviewing and approving the actual lessons taught. According to State Statute, they have that right.

Depka many times said that allowing the parents on the committee to approve of actual lessons would slow the process down. She seemed to favor that the teachers gather the materials--some prepared, some designed--and then parents (not necessarily HG&D parents) can look at the program. If all of that went to committee, it slows down the process.

David Marcello asked how long would that take?

One semester for the staff approval method, Depka answered. Dr. Stewart said that maybe we need to say, this is what we need done, this is the time frame.  She added, This time we are not starting from zero--some (outcomes) were not changed.

Marcello then said, we heard testimony for Pilgrim Park's Principal Galster that the binders are not in order. We ought to give support to teachers and parents sooner than later. I am in favor of speeding up the process, that is why I like the pre-printed materials. (The "Game Plan" Galster held up at the April school board meeting from Just Say Yes.)

I think Depka and Stewart said that they looked at them, but had not been given any materials.

Marcello estimated that 70% of parents probably would agree with the parents on the committee (that the pre-printed program was good.)

Board President Meg Wartman mentioned that the board had not approved of those materials. She also mentioned that as policy is written now, there is no formalized step for parent review. They then talked about where parent review would come in to play.

Dr. Gibson emphasized that the authority (for approval) resides with the board.

Steve Schwei doesn't think any board review of lessons is needed. (He earlier referred to board review as micromanaging.)

Marcello rebutted, someone should.

Gehl said, what I am looking for is elevating the voice of parents to that of staff.

The Journal reported Gehl as saying, "greater scrutiny is warranted because without it, Elmbrook and other districts have 'led to a case where (sexual) abstinence is presented as an option, but it's nowhere close to being presented as the healthiest option.'" We're not standing behind the policy that says abstinence is promoted. I looked at the pre-packaged, Just Say Yes. I liked much of it. It addresses hesitant teachers, it is uniform, transparent, consistent and aggressively promotes abstinence as the healthiest choice.

Gibson again said the way policy is currently written, (review) is not the role for the board or parents.

Marcello stood up for parents again, We'd like to see parents review this. Later he added, Why wouldn't you solicit the parents on HG&D? 

Depka stated that they want to expand to more parents to look at all materials. In just approving outcomes it took 1/2 year already. If we took actual lessons, it would take longer.

Allgaier said, We have a terrific source in this HG&D team. I would advocate for a very strong role of HG&D team parents. They will reach consensus, the ones (lessons) with disagreement will come to the board.

Wartman added, Prior to parent review, the HG&D team should review. 

There was lots of back an forth on the issue of who reviews the lessons. Some comparisons were made to how they approve of other classes like math, but to me, that is rather apples to oranges.

HG&D parent members, who wish a greater role in reviewing and approving what is being taught in HG&D, have every right to that role. Board members Allgaier, Marcello, Gehl, and probably Jones, seem like they are interested in reviewing/approving at the very least the HG&D lessons the committee couldn't come to consensus on.

It may not be the way we did it in the past, but that does not mean that the way we used to do it is the only way to accomplish the goal of a HG&D program. Plus, past methodology is hardly a shining beacon. Remember last year when oral sex instruction was going to be taught to 6th graders without proper approval process?

Considering there is pre-written curriculum in place that the parent members of the HG&D committee and middle school principal Galster thought excellent, it would seem pre-printed would be the more efficient place to start, rather than reinventing the wheel.

One statement from Dr. Gibson stands out as a glaring, What? Fairly Conservative talked about that yesterday. Please know that nothing the HG&D parents asked for was "Christian" material. Just Say Yes is not a Christian based group either, and an emphasis on abstinence as the best choice is the State's priority.

Past Postings: Updated: So What Happened With HG&D and School Board? April 11, 2008

Links:

(Be sure to contact our state legislators today about budget!)

Elmbrook's Human Growth and Development team (sex education) and the school board are meeting tonight for a work session.

Anyone can attend these sessions, though attendees are not allowed to address the board.

Agenda:

6:00      1.  Review Human Growth and Development Policy Revisions
                 as Recommended by Advisory Committee

6:45      2.  Review Process Questions
                 • Process for Review of Curriculum Outcomes
                 • Process for Selection of Materials to Deliver Outcomes

6:55      3.  Adjournment

It seems that although the state statutes emphasizes an abstinence first approach and prohibits directing a student to abortion only solutions to an unplanned pregnancy, the curriculum does not necessarily reflect the state's priorities.

I plan on attending; hope you will too.

April 8, 2008  HG&D Advisory Committee Recommendations 

Previous posts: Updated: So What Happened with HG&D and School Board? 

HG&D "Outcomes" on School Board Agenda Tuesday 

Links:

Thank you Elmbrook board for accommodating the few parents who still want a half-day kindergarten experience for their children.

Although I still am not convinced that all day 5K academically has any long term benefit, at least parents, who believe a full day for a 5 year old is too much, can opt for just the half-day offering.

I had wondered if something like a combined full-day/half-day class could be arranged but did not know how that would work out logistically. Elmbrook mixes in half-day kindergartners explains how it will work--at least curriculum wise. (Hopefully the half-day students will be sprinkled across all of the classes so we don't end up with 2 or 3 too small afternoon classes.)

Because of the concentration of core classes in the morning (can you call kindergarten classes core?), will parents feel a little more free to take their full-day children out of school for an occasional afternoon? I hate to see children have to give up a play date at the park on a beautiful day or a fun trip to Betty Brinn, etc. Only time will tell. 

Past Posts: Half-Day Kindergarten Extinct? Show Me the Benefit

Does 4K Deserve Tax Dollars? (Cites studies such as "Early Education Shows No Benefit")

Links:

If you are a parent of an Elmbrook High School student, are you going to be silent about East and Central High School's Day of Silence?

Some parents opt to keep their teens home on this day, others may just inform their children that this is happening on Friday.

Whatever you decide, please read up on the event, read the information from Elmbrook at end of this post, and then guide your child (student) as you see fit. Also, be aware there is a counter homosexual agenda program called the Day of Truth on Monday, April 28th.

Don't know what the Day of Silence is? According to the American Family Association, it is a special day "started a decade ago by an adult homosexual advocacy group, the Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), with the goal of promoting homosexuality to all students in a given school."

If you check the Day of Silence web page, "The National Day of Silence brings attention to anti-LGBT name-calling, bullying and harassment in schools".(I think LGBT stands for Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender/Transexual.) It also mentions that this year's event is to be held in memory of Lawrence King, an 8th grader who was killed in Feb. because of his sexual orientation. (The website does not mention this, but Lawrence was permitted by a residential care center for "abused, neglected, and severely emotionally disturbed children to attend school in nail polish, makeup and high-heeled boots ."

Evidentially, students who participate in this event often wear signs around their necks and remain silent all day--whether a teacher calls on them in class or not. 

I asked Dr. Gibson (Andy Smith) on April 23rd if Elmbrook participates in Day of Silence.

Andy Smith replied the same day with,  "I'll check with the high schools, but let me first make sure I know what I'm looking into."

After a few more back and forth emails, Andy stated "Yes, the Day of Silence is a school sanctioned event, authorized at the principal level. It is part of a nationwide event. The observance of the Day of Silence has taken place for a number of years now at both Central and East."

Here is the information Andy Smith, Director of Communications for Elmbrook Schools sent regarding East High School:

1. Yes, the Day of Silence is a school sanctioned event, authorized at the principal level. It is part of a nationwide event. The observance of the Day of Silence has taken place for a number of years now at both Central and East.

 

2. It is not sponsored or organized by either of the schools, but rather by a student club at each school that promotes respect for all persons and takes a special interest in the personal safety at school of all persons, including those who may consider themselves to have a personal sexual identity different from the mainstream of heterosexual male and female.

 

3. Just as with the activities of any other club or organization, information about the Day of Silence is prepared not by the school but by the club ... if desired, for instance, items could be prepared for the daily announcements. The principal signs-off on poster designs and displays for the Day of Silence, just as with posters for events sponsored by other clubs and organizations. Further, any of the clubs that have met the requirements to be recognized by the school are treated with similarity regarding access to school facilities, use of tables for fundraisers, use of rooms and the like.

 

4. There are two ways that a student may participate in the Day of Silence. A person may be an active participant, or a person may simply show his or her support for the club's purposes and the purposes of the day's observance. An active participant will typically wear black and wear a special pin. A supporter may or may not wear black and wears a different but similar pin. A participant typically chooses not to speak throughout the day, however, such persons are not allowed to fail to respond to a question asked by a teacher, staff person or administrator. A supporter typically does speak (does not participate in the silence) is supportive by use of the pin.

 

5. At East, there is a voluntary end-of-the day meeting in a classroom that is called, "Breaking the Silence," where those in attendance may share their experiences, particularly whether anyone made any disrespectful or hurtful comments to individuals. Those in attendance may talk about the impact they believe they did or did not have in promoting tolerance for others and respect of all persons.

 

6. Just as with any other sanctioned club that has met the requirements for recognition, there is a club adviser, no different from any other organization. This club, like any other can do fundraising to support their various supplies, activities and goals. The adviser is paid from the unit budget of the school, the same as any other adviser.

 

I tried to be as thorough as possible, and I hope this helps with your inquiry. I appreciate your giving me a bit of time to pull together the information. (10:45am)

 

Andy 

F.A.Q. on the Day of Silence 

Links: 4th Annual Weed Out, May 3rd, Mary Knoll Park

Elmbrook just ended half-day kindergarten for 5 year olds. Why? Because there was lack of interest in half day kindergarten. The public only wanted full day.

But is that the way we make academic decisions these days? We do this or that just because parents want it?

Can anyone tell me the long term academic benefit of going from half day to full day kindergarten? Not the budget benefit to the school district, I am speaking of the academic benefit.

Last fall, during the debate over ending 4-K, School Board President Meg Wartman realized that Elmbrook never evaluated the long term benefit to all day 5-K in the same way they were scrutinizing the long term benefit to 4-K. The conclusion was of course that there was no measurable long term benefit to 4-K and so the district could not justify continuing 4-K.

But what about the long term All-Day 5-K gain? This is what I blogged from the 4-K vote meeting:

"Meg took issue with his assumption that a No vote showed a lack of planning. She said, 4K came out of a financed need in the 2005 study and 4K was not even at the top of the list. Since then, we have been trying to prove academic merit, which we can't find. That brought up a startling comment regarding all day 5K. Meg questioned the benefits of all day 5K--We have not even tried to show the benefit of it by 5th grade--have we ever shown 5th grade gain? (Again, check the broadcast for her exact words.)"

So why have we bypassed this same scrutiny for all day 5-K?

I think it is all about the budget--primarily when the decision to go to all day was made a few years ago.

You see, going all day in 5-K does the same thing as going half-day in 4-K. It increases the state aid by 100% per half day student.

State aid does not pay for the entire education costs per Elmbrook student. The Elmbrook taxpayer must make up the difference, which is significant. I believe in 2006, for example, Elmbrook received $1,701 per full time student in state aid. That would mean for half-day kindergarten students, Elmbrook received $850. So the move to all day kindergarten for those students who were half-day, the district would receive $850 more. The Elmbrook School District taxpayers must make up about $5,435 or more difference, however.

Granted, Elmbrook made the largest leap when all day 5-K was implemented. My question is, did Elmbrook ever weigh the cost to the taxpayer of going full day against the measurable long term academic gain? Judging by Board President Wartman's comments from last fall, it would seem not. 

The district could have handled the all day 5-K question much differently. If they would have provided only a section or 2 of all day 5-K (enrollment by lottery) and left the remaining sections as half-day, then I think we would see a different level of interest right now. Since all day is really just a nice-ity, not a necessity academically speaking, we should really be asking why we are going to all day 5-K. 

I believe that the school district has a responsibility to provide a good primary and secondary education to Elmbrook resident students. Period.  Extras, like all day 5-K (and extracurriculars) need to be examined under the the lens of longterm academic benefit.

Links: 4th Annual Weed Out, May 3rd, Mary Knoll Park

Kinsey Park Clean Up and Pier

There were about 40 residents attending last Tuesday's School Board meeting--most of them because of the HG&D topic.

Early in the meeting, one man from the Christian Civil Liberties Union threatened to picket Elmbrook's building project if the school adopted the controversial oral sex warning policy in the 6th and 8th grade.

At about 8:05pm, Dr. Stewart began her report by stating the HG&D team had 2 tasks. One was to look at policy and make recommendations and the other was to look at the curriculum and outcomes. She then asked the board if they had questions.

Steve Schwei requested that the chart of outcomes for each grade level be reprinted, so the rationale would be noted for every outcome: 73 Outcomes were unchanged, 38 updated, 17 new, and 19 eliminated. 

Ms. Depka clarified that Outcomes were the individual pieces of the total Curriculum picture.

(Please note that while those definitions may be Ms. Depka’s and Dr. Stewart’s interpretation of those terms, they do not reflect the entire HG&D team’s definition of “curriculum” or use of the term “curriculum” in the DPI’s instructions for HG&D. This issue is too large to cover here and will have to wait for another post. Just be aware however, that the DPI states, “...nothing in the law prevents the committee from actually writing and developing lessons or a curriculum, for that matter.” and refers to curriculum (lessons) in their instructions.)

Dr. Stewart (I think it was her, not Depka) stated that there were 2 areas that the HG&D team did not come to agreement on. One regarded the use of substitute or alternate lessons. Often the substitute materials are unrelated lessons, and they are not consistent. Should the substituted lessons be consistent so parents could know ahead of time what they would be? Should the substituted lesson be graded? This topic still needs further discussion but is not a hill to die on. 

The other area the HG&D team could not come to consensus on was much more important. Once outcomes are agreed upon and approved by the team, who develops and approves the actual lesson materials for each outcome/curriculum item? This is a question that needs answering.

*Currently, policy directs the Advisory Committee to make recommendations on curriculum/outcomes only. Faculty then creates lessons for the curriculum/outcomes and chooses educational materials to be used in the lessons. A public review by grade level parents is then held to obtain input prior to finalization of lessons. Once lessons are finalized, lessons and materials are available in various venues for review so parents have access to lessons and materials children will complete. Parents then can determine if they want to 'opt opt' of la lesson. The committee provided their views in the form of a survey, which can be used by the Board of Education for a final decision. 

*(Again, this is how Dr. Stewart is portraying the policy on curriculum development, not what State Statute 118.019 mandates.)

But does the current or future policy prevent a teacher from straying from the lesson? How would a parent know the level of detail and diversity in a broad Outcome?

Example: In the 1st grade one of the Outcomes is to "Describe different family structures". That could be rather innocent or not. One parent might just assume that means discussing how some families only have a mother and children, children living with grandparents, or some other traditional arrangement. But could a teacher go into detail about Johnny has two daddies or Johnny has two mommies or I don't even want to think about the possibilities?

By leaving the actual content of the lesson up to the faculty, there could be a very wide spectrum of information taught to the children because there is no hard-set curriculum in place at the time the HG&D team is approving outcomes.

If I were on the HG&D team, I would want to know exactly what the lessons plans were for each outcome before I would feel comfortable approving it.

If I were a parent of an Elmbrook student, I would want these lessons to be consistent and scripted. That way I could look at each topic and decide if I felt this was appropriate for my child or not--ahead of time.

It seemed some sort of easily accessible binder with the content of each lesson for parents to look at ahead of time does not really exist at the present time. The HG&D committee recommended that "Lessons should be available online for parent review, as well as at the Central Administrative Offices, schools, and local libraries."  (That would be an improvement!)

The board and members and the audience were flipping through the 36 page packet of proposed outcomes for each grade level during this time. Board President Meg Wartman emphasized that none of the proposed changes to the current HG&D curriculum would take place until Fall of 2009. 

Time now for the public comment... 

A young woman--a former Elmbrook student--stunned the audience with her comment that went something like this: (Watch the cable broadcast for her exact words--I don't have cable.)

I learned what oral sex was in 8th grade 'cuz I caught 2 kids doing it (in the bathroom?) at Pilgrim Park. (That is what I wrote down in my notebook--I could be wrong.) She went on to say something about how there was a 4 year gap between them addressing the subject and this incident indicating that in the meantime diseases were spread. Evidentially she and other kids thought, "it didn't count as sex" because they (teachers) didn't talk about it. Her premise was that you couldn't control being exposed to the subject, but The one thing you can control is who tells them about it.

I'm thinking, so you saw this going on and because no one ever told you about it before you thought it was a perfectly OK thing to do? I would not think that would be the reaction of someone witnessing that act. One very good question to ask yourself, if you are ever in doubt about if something is right or wrong is, would I do this in front of my parents or a trusted adult? If the answer is no, then chances are, it isn't a good thing to do. But that is just me.

We seemed to have a president who was also confused about "it didn't count as sex". I think the confusion points to a broader issue. There needs to be some sort of guiding principles to place in our minds and the minds of our children, because it is not possible to "warn" or "instruct" about every possible subject, fad, or rumor. A basic, Any sexual pleasure apart from that with your spouse is sin, and I will set no wicked thing before my eye, pretty much covers all areas. These of course are faith based. But statistics on depression and disease do support these faith based premises.

Needless to say, the audience was a little taken back by that young woman's comments. 

Later, when Don Galster the principal of Pilgrim Park and member of the HG&D team spoke, he noted that he had been here for 4 years (well after that young woman's time at Pilgrim). Don pointed out that the members of the HG&D team, who were present in the audience, were the middle school parent representatives. He stated that things were more volatile at the Middle School level. Things were unresolved. Something needs to happen at the Middle School that is different (not like the former student's example though!)

Principal Galster then made a very good observation. Whenever Elmbrook made the decision to do their own material, it may have been because there were not good materials available. We have a Middle School curriculum now that drifts off into Phy. Ed., Science, etc. The binders (with lesson information) are split up--they are all over the building.

He explained that parents want to know what their children are going to hear (but can't because the binders are spread out.) There are very good materials out there (now); there is curriculum that parents have supplied. Every sensitive topic is scripted, written in appealing way, with scary graphs and stories. If a parent walked in, they could show them (what the lessons would entail.) 

This was a camp program, but it is good, he said as he held up "Game Plan"  by JustSayYes. Elmbrook doesn't have to create the perfect program because it already exists!, he concluded. The audience applauded.

Other parents spoke. Since I am running long here, I will save them for another post.

Since that meeting, there has been quite a bit of commentary about the board meeting on Fairly Conservative. One comment surprised me; it was from the young woman who spoke at the board meeting. The content of her 2nd comment is a bit different from what my impression was on Tuesday. Her first comment seemed more definite, the second more rumor. Only the cable broadcast can confirm the first.

Comment 19 "When, in my opening statement, I said I first learned about oral sex from my peers when 2 kids were caught doing it in the bathroom in 7th grade. I will admit right up front that this could be pure speculation, but that isn’t the point. The point is that one person started saying it happened, and suddenly, by the end of the day, every kid at Pilgrim Park was talking about oral sex in the bathroom, and a fair amount of students (myself included) didn’t know what a [it] was. So, I had the pleasure of learning it from another 12 year old."

The meeting went on and it became very clear that finalizing the new HG&D program will be a monumental task. As Meg Wartman stated earlier, nothing will change until fall of 2009. But given the ordeal ahead of the HG&D team, the board, and faculty, I'm thinking they will be fortunate to be finished by then!

Since there are good materials out there now, I do wonder if adopting one of those programs would be the better way to go. I like the idea of scripted and consistent.  I also like the idea of the lessons being on DVD.

Still to come, Comments from the HG&D team parents and Are we following the State Statute correctly? 

Links:

Hard to believe there could be an issue I am as equally passionate about as preventing wasting taxpayers' dollars in our schools, but Human Growth and Development (Sex Ed.) definitely qualifies.

This Tuesday, April 8, 2008, from 7 - 10:15pm at the Central Administration offices, the school board will meet to discuss several important items. The usual agenda items start at 7pm, newly elected officers take their oath at about 7:35, the High Schools Facilities - Next Steps report is scheduled for 7:40. (This is important, but the cows are out of the barn here.)

The BIG issue of the evening is the Human Growth and Development Outcomes and Next Steps  agenda item at 8:00pm.

Parents, you need to be aware of what is going on in your child's classroom. I have a feeling I will be shocked at what is deemed age appropriate.

If you have been following the HG&D issue, you will remember that last fall, one parent sounded the alarm that starting in the 6th grade, students were to learn be warned about oral sex. A letter was sent to all middle school parents and one, who read through the whole thing, noticed the reference. That parent notified Cindy Kilkenny and she posted the letter. 

School districts frequently dismiss parental concerns about HG&D subject matter by saying that they can simply opt their child out of these classes. The trouble is, often there is not a set date these subjects will be taught. Undesired subjects can pop up at any time, which makes planning for an opt out nearly impossible. There is also a stigma attached to a child being opted out. This is why I suggested that these subjects only be taught in an opt IN arrangement.

There are about 45 minutes alloted for this discussion. If you look through the 50 page Human Growth and Development Outcomes, you will note that the criteria is very vague. If you discuss sexually transmitted diseases for example, how much detail do you go into? When they discuss different types of families in elementary grades, is that traditional families? or will there be 2 mommies, etc.? If I were a student's parent, I would want to know that.

What happens if a teacher does not feel right about teaching the material? Do they have the option to OPT OUT? I am wondering if 45 minutes will be enough time for this agenda item.

After that very important issue, the Pilgrim Park Middle School Boiler Study report at 8:45. Since Pilgrim is about the same age as Central, I am very interested in their solution to repair/replace.

Please spread the word about the HG&D agenda item to parents of Elmbrook students. They should be part of this discussion.

Other meetings of interest:

Park land for fire station? Monday, April 7, 7pm

District 7 and Concerned Calhoun Community meetings April 9th and 10th

Links:

Can you imagine going to the polls and not having an opinion on a $62.2 million dollar referendum? Well, at least 294 voters did just that on Tuesday.

Anyone have any ideas why that would be?

Elm Grove had 45 ballots left blank; Brookfield had 249, both work out to be around 2% of the vote.

I did speak to one younger woman about the referendum on Friday. She said she really did not know much about it. She didn't feel she needed to look into it, because she did not have any children.

You do pay taxes though, I said. She seemed confused by that.

Another person told me of an older neighbor who did not feel it was their place to make any decision about the referendum, because they no longer had school age children. I can only wonder how many people share this view.

I am not sure where that idea comes from, but the school system belongs to all of the taxpayers, not just the parents of the students. Collectively we make the decision to increase spending by referendum.

Links:

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.  

I am very pleased that Dan Sutton and Ron Balzer will be returning to the council, but extremely sorry that Terry Halmstad will not be joining them. Thank you, Terry for making the effort to make a difference.

 
Renee' Lowerr will join Brookfield's Common Council though, and that is a good thing too. She won by 105 votes:  Lowerr, 797  Schellinger, 692. That one was closer than I thought.

I think Lisa Mellone will appreciate having an enthusiastic fellow alderman for our district. Congratulations Renee'.
 

Elmbrook's referendum passed by 634 votes: Yes, 7,557 to No, 6,923. I would have thought in our current economic climate that it would not have passed. Note to self, next time I move (I should really say, if I move, since I never pictured myself living anywhere else), make sure our household income is not below the median.

Chanel 4 is calling the State Supreme Court for Gableman, so that definitely lifts my spirits. It has been 40 years since an incumbent lost, so this is quite a remarkable win.

He stated in his acceptance speech, "I believe the proper role of a judge is to apply the law not make it." I like that! He offered thanks to God for keeping him through the campaign. I like that even better.  Gableman's victory shifts the court by 1 vote to the conservative side, so that makes me very happy.

Gleisner lost. His race was not a hill to die on. Gleisner was more of a social conservative, but Neubauer maybe be better for the business climate in Wisconsin.

One oddity, in the school board race, the candidates who dropped out of the race each received over 4,000 votes!

Do we interpret that as voters are not very well informed or chalk it up to a protest vote?

OK, I can go to bed now. Glad this is over and done. Zzz   

Links:

I could have titled this STUNNING: Pt 2, Putting $26 mil for HVAC/mechanicals into perspective, but that would not have been as much fun. You may wish to read part 1 first.

I only recently realized that the dollar amount devoted to HVAC/mechanical upgrades for Elmbrook's $62.2 million referendum is an even greater percentage than the 25% ($15.8 mil) for the new athletic facilities. HVAC/mech. amounts to 41% of total dollars.

Again, these are my observations and conclusions based on the facts available that I have read in the paper, from an email from CG Schmidt, from district documents, from board members and from sources in HVAC related fields.

This is the way I see these HVAC/mechanical upgrades.

1st: The dollar amounts. In part one I concluded that $43/sq. ft. was the cost for replacing the HVAC/mechanicals for the existing gym space.Square footage of existing gym related space at both high schools is 120,000sq.ft. 

$5.2 million divided by 120,000sq ft = $43/sq.ft. for HVAC/mech. upgrade costs. This is a little lower because the pool areas are not to be air conditioned. Board member Glen Allgaier confirmed Monday that the gyms would be air conditioned though.

2nd: According to Glen, if the referendum does not pass, the dollar amount to do the "overall HVAC system replacement as proposed" is $26 million. Tom Gehl did not mention the total dollar amount, but did indicate that the amount was too large to "take out of the operational budget."

$26 million is such a large number it is difficult to fathom how that translates into the school space. How do you decide if it is worth it? How much is that in relationship to each classroom? How about to the gyms?

One way to look at it is the per square foot cost. This is often how construction is measured to give the buyer, in this case the school district and us, something to grasp at in terms of cost/ area. Glen confirmed this is how it is allocated at this point, "Given the absence of detailed architectural plans which will only be developed if the referendum passes, these estimates are all done on a 'per square foot' basis."

The district Facility "needs", rationale states both high schools have a total of 512,000 square feet.

If we take the $26 million designated for HVAC/mechanical upgrades/replacements, we can calculate the price / square foot. $26mil divided by 512,000 sq. ft. = $50.78/sq.ft.

That $50.78/sq.ft. figure covers new plumbing, electrical, sprinklers, and new HVAC. How much for just the new heating, ventilating, air conditioning system?

Glen did not have that information available. (My fault for asking too late.) But I did see in the HSST minutes from Aug. 1, 2007, pp 3, that members were given a figure of $24/sq.ft. from contractors.

One of my sources, who has been in the HVAC business for 40 years with several major companies said of Elmbrook's changeover from steam to new hot water/air conditioning, that no private industry or school would do it because it would be too expensive.

So let's see how expensive it would be. For a small sized classroom, 750 sq.ft. X $24.00 = $18,000. For a large sized classroom 1,250 average sq.ft. X $24.00 = $30,000. For an existing gym, 12,000 X $21.00 (half $43) = $252,000.

Are we sure we want to do this?

That seems to be a lot of money. No wonder private industry and private schools would not make a change of this scope. My HVAC source told me that Milwaukee Lutheran is about the same age. They never needed to do anything like this.

I have a hard time believing that the entire system needs replacing. The oldest parts of the school are 55 years old, but the youngest additions are 30.

But if you are looking at adding air conditioning from the start, then that maybe drove the complete system replacement question. For air conditioning with a hot water system (I am not sure you can do it with steam), the cold supply lines are usually insulated because otherwise they sweat inside the walls. (That suggests to me that walls need to be opened and that gets expensive too.)

They are talking of all new Univents, new 4 pipe system, cooling equipment, new boilers ( 7 - 8 high efficiency but shorter life span), and I am sure there is more.

The HVAC study article stated that the HSST, (emphasis added)

...budgeted for full replacement of heating pipes. However, without in-depth analysis (testing), full understanding of the conditions of the pipes cannot be known, Bill Armstrong, an engineer who served on the eProgress team, said at a Jan. 8 board meeting. "Newer pipes aren't always better pipes," said Armstrong, emphasizing that a brand new four-pipe system, as proposed in the current plan, might not be necessary.

They are budgeting for a new 4 pipe system. That sounds expensive. The report has come out. I wonder, if the results of that condition report showed all the pipes to be rotten, why haven't we heard about it? Glen Allgaier emailed this morning that, "the results of the HVAC study were presented and discussed at length at the last Board meeting, including the conclusion that the pipes at BEHS are in good shape and have no need to be replaced."

Few of the items in this referendum are spec'd out. There are just general dollar allocations assigned to certain areas. That is why when we asked on the tour if the windows would open, thus reducing the "want" for air conditioning, the answer was, we don't know that yet, nothing is specified at this time.

If the voters approve the referendum, then wherever the district can reduce costs results in the district having extra funds to work with for something else. 

If the referendum fails, next year East was looking at installing new burners anyway. (Not uncommon and they would be more efficient.) Those old steam boilers can chug on for a long time and if tweaked well, are not all that inefficient--especially considering the pay back.

Yes, the small, modular type high efficiency ones are more energy efficient, but at what price? (Think of a  Prius.) But they also have a much shorter lifespan--some around 15 years. Think disposable.

Efficiency is great, but pay back also needs to be part of the equation. 

In fairness, I do not know how much just making the burner improvements to the present boilers would run. Shawn the facility manager at Central said they were putting in one of those high efficient modular type boilers for heating pool water and domestic water during warm months. They will do it this summer if the referendum fails we were told. (Should have done that years ago instead of running the huge boiler all year.)

But Pilgrim Park (built in 1958) is making some boiler improvements this summer, I believe, with part of that $3.5 million dollar budget surplus we ended up with last fall. It cannot be that expensive. 

The HVAC article also indicated, "As part of the study, the contracted engineering firm will apply for grants through Focus on Energy..."  These grants allow for lighting projects that change out inefficient fluorescent lighting to efficient fluorescent. Focus on Energy grants were available off and on during