On Tuesday, voters will make a decision on a $23.5 million school referendum that would include giving the green light to an elementary school on Madison’s far west side, but school district officials see it as just the first of several in the near future.
Based on current residential growth patterns, as many as five new elementary schools may eventually be needed to accommodate new generations of children in and around Madison, according to Madison Metropolitan School District Superintendent Art Rainwater.
Interesting timing.
Why is this “interesting timing”? I mean, anyone who follows the MMSD knows that the far west side of Madison expects to grow into an attendance area the size of the current Memorial attendance area…so it follows that they’ll eventually need more elementary schools, a middle school (or two) and a new high school. Rainwater was very clear about this when he met with PTO presidents in September.
I think that as long as MMSD has a 5 and 10 yr. growth and building plan, the taxpayers will be cool with funding their ambitions.
HI David:
Well, here’s why:
The MMSD’s 11/06 referendum page makes no reference or link to a long term building plan (linked to from the MMSD’s home page):
http://www.mmsd.org/budget/ref06/
Those paying close attention to the District are aware of these discussions, but beyond that small group, I think there’s little (voter) knowledge.
For a variety of reasons, some citizens don’t believe the community growth projections:
http://www.schoolinfosystem.org/archives/2006/10/falling_need_fo.php
Peter Gascoyne offers another perspective:
http://www.schoolinfosystem.org/archives/2006/10/a_new_school_on.php
We’ll see.
Jim: I thought that the long range building needs were spelled out here:
http://www.mmsd.org/budget/ref06/long_range_plan.htm
One thing I’ve learned in this whole Equity Policy Task Force thing is that very very few citizens actually utilize the MMSD website, let alone delve into the intricate details. Folks who read and blog here do, of course.
The timing is interesting from where I sit. I cannot believe that it will help the average voter to support the referendum when the message is “there is plenty more where that came from” a week before the vote.
For the record, a list of dates does not a plan make.
The additional potential referenda came before the board in March last year. There has been no substantial subsequent action since the April elections.
There also are substantial flaws with the East Task Force Report, notably the failure of the district to include the LaFollette attendance area in the charge to the committee, an omission which has a definite impact on what is expected and how it might be handled.
The story *might* be helpful, but I its a pretty risky pre-referenda communications strategy.
Given the risk in this “pre-referenda communications strategy” who encouraged the Cap Times to run the story — referendum supporters, referendum opponents, the superintendent, or someone else?
The Cap Times isn’t a PR firm. I’d bet that an editor (big surprise!) made the decision to run the story. Now, if the story was based on a press release, that’s another matter:)
Perhaps Ms. Troller was talking to Art and (gasp!) asked a question and he answered it truthfully? I still think that an honest answer from the CEO of the MMSD is better than a dodge, even a week before a referendum.