The Rhinelander school district board met again as a Committee of the Whole this week to consider referendum options. After discussion, the board seemed ready to move forward with a two-question referendum that would “stem the hemorrhage” of programs and staff.
The first question would ask voters to exceed the levy by $1.5 million/year for three years to keep the staff and number of school buildings at its current level.
The second question would be a one-time levy of somewhere between $13.5 million or $14 million, to cover deferred maintenance projects and some remodeling and repair projects to the high school. Gym space would be remodeled for more space and the five-lane pool would be modernized. It would also pay for the addition of four extra classrooms at each of the two elementary schools.
The board discussed two possibilities for when to go to referendum: in April 2010 during a county election, and in November or December 2009, at a time when there is no local election. The latter, considered a special election, would cost the district from $10,000 to $12,000.
Line in the Sand
Whether the referendum takes place in November or April, the board was unanimous in expressing its desire to let the public know what cuts would be made if such a referendum fails.
Board member Judy Conlin said, “We need to look at where we draw the line in the sand – where is it: at the six-period day? For me, that would not provide a quality education.”
Board member Mike Roberts agreed. “In case the referendum doesn’t pass, we need to see where that line in the sand is, as we would be forced to move toward a school district with minimum state requirements. We will still be serving a larger district of 8,000-plus, larger than Three Lakes, for instance, and this requires more services.”
The administration furnished a potential list of drawdowns that would take place if a referendum failed.
The following actions would be taken in the year 2010-11, in order of priority:
Close and sell South Parking building, requiring a mandatory grade re-configuration, for a savings of $117,000.
Close and sell Cassian-Woodboro building, with an accompanying grade re-configuration, for a savings of $120,000.
Reduce extra-curricular activities for a savings of $27,800.
Reduce custodial staff, for a savings of $472,000.
Reduce regular education paraprofessional staff, for a savings of $200,000.
Reduce full-time teaching staff by 12.5 by raising class sizes from the current low 20s to low to mid-30s in grades 4-12; or by reducing electives at the middle and high schools; or by doing a combination of larger class sizes and the reduction of electives, for a savings of $1 million.
In the year 2011-12, the following drawdown actions would be taken:
Reduce full-time staff, raise class sizes and reduce electives to achieve a savings of $296,000.
Decertify the elementary and secondary charter school and absorb these students into the other district school buildings for a savings of $240,000.
Reduce high school graduation requirements and move to a six-period day; reduce staff at the middle school and eliminate all professional travel and staff development, for a savings of $160,000.
Eliminate all Fund 10 staff development and travel and impose a moratorium on the acquisition of textbooks and instructional matrials; elminate middle school activities and travel; reduce administration staff, for a savings of $320,000.
Move 7th and 8th grade to the high school building; with grades 3 – 6 moving to the middle school building to reduce full-time staff, for a savings of $240,000.
Close and sell Crescent school building for a savings of $125,000.
Moratorium on all maintenance upkeep and repair of buildings, except for emergencies, for a savings of $500,000.
The board had convened to hear discussion only; no vote was taken.
At times, it seemed the board members were functioning as cheerleaders for one another, to boost confidence as they once again approach the public after three failed referendums.
“We have to do this,” said board member Jody Doro. “We have agonized for months. Do we want 40 to 50 kids in a classroom? We’ve cut-and-slashed our way through teachers and programs and buildings. What else can we get rid of?”
Roberts said that passing a referendum “would give us breathing room for three years. If we don’t pass a referendum, the cuts we have to make will affect the kids who need the most help in our district.”
Conlin said, “the additional classrooms at the elementary schools are especially important, for our commitment to SAGE [a state incentive program to keep classroom size at 15 per teacher in the lower grades]. It would allow us to bring all the pre-K classes back to the elementary schools. The Pre-K program benefits the district financially while providing a level playing field for all children.
“Repairing the pool will allow 500 freshmen and sophomores to take swimming as part of their phy ed requirements,” Conlin added. “It’s not about the swim team or swim club. If we don’t repair the pool, they’ll have to take other phy ed classes. In our environment, kids need to know how to swim. And repairing the pool would allow the lifeguard classes to be taught at the high school."
Board president Deb Durchslag said, “We have to be stewards of these buildings, as we are of our homes and our cars. This referendum is a huge cutback from the $35 million, the $25 million, of previous referendums, as the administration continues to look for ways to decrease the tax burden.”
Board member Jim Winkler suggested, “We need a paradigm shift in our thinking. Rather than focusing on the negative, the bottom line, what to cut next, we need to look forward to where we want to position ourselves in 10 to 15 years.” Winkler said he would like to focus on developing new technologies and ways to keep students in the district.
Doro responded that the Strategic Plan drawn up by the community in 2005 “was our long-term plan. As for planning ahead for 10 years, all of us [on the board] could be gone in three years, and another plan could come along.”
Conlin’s reply: “Jim, we’ve been doing your paradigm shift. In the 1950s, this district taught to the middle-level student. We’re now finding a variety of ways to meet every student – through our virtual, charter and school-to-work programs. We’re trying to be forward-looking and not just teaching to the middle.”
Durchslag’s response was that the district is considered a progressive one by the Wisconsin Association of School Boards. “Moving forward has always been part of what we want, but we are faced with an incredible decimation of our district and now we need to make a choice with a referendum. We’ve already cut 150 FTEs [full-time equivalent positions] in the past seven years. You’d have to conclude we’re trying to be fiscally responsible.”
From the audience, RHS teacher Nancy Kuczmarski said to Winkler (referring to a remark Winkler made at a previous meeting about the district being stuck in the 1950s), “If only we could go back to the 1950s. This high school was a palace. I learned to swim in the pool. The pool was awesome, a great support for education. There is a link between physical fitness and academics.”
November verdict
The push for a November referendum came from several board members and members of the audience. From the board came the concern about letting the district know as soon as possible how many people will need to be laid off.
Roberts said, “Holding it in November would save work for the administration [in planning for lay-offs].”
Audience member Dave Heck said, “The community has made a huge mistake. Our tax monies are going to other communities. Interest rates are going up. We need to consider a special election at a time other than the general election in April, so the voters can focus on the schools.”
From the audience Sue Makris said, “In terms of lay-offs, the sooner the district knows what’s coming the better.”
District business manager Marta Kwiatkowski confirmed that lay-off numbers should be in hand by November, and March 1 is the deadline for notices of non-renewal.
Audience member Kelly Herman repeated remarks made at other meetings, saying it would be a mistake to push through a referendum in November. Herman also made a point of clarification about the K-12 Voters United position, saying the group did not recommend an upgrade to the gym or remodeling the pool. “Our recommendations were made one year ago. Since then there have been tons of changes. I would not support [gym and pool upgrades]," she said.
To go to referendum as early as November would require a decision by the board soon, to meet deadlines for drawing up the legalese of the questions, getting board approval and the 45-day posting period.
