March 04, 2005

Annual Spring Four Act Play: Madison School's Budget Process

Spring is definitely coming. On February 17, the Madison School Board performed Act 1 of the four-act play that is our annual school budget process.

Act 1 is the unveiling of the Budget Forecast. In this Act, the administration solemnly announces that the district faces-once again-"The Budget Gap". The Budget Gap is the difference between what the Board wants to spend and what we can spend without a successful referendum to increase operating funds. It is not a gap caused by a drop in state funding.

To nobody's surprise, the Budget Gap is big and ugly. Under current state law, revenues from property taxes will increase about 2.35% for next year. However, the administration's "same service" budget requires a revenue increase of more than 4%. The Gap for next year is $8.6M.

Next will come a chorus of threats to slash programs and staff to "close the gap". District staff will come on stage bearing long lists of positions and programs cut in previous years to close the gap. The mood will be ominous when the curtain comes down on Act 1.

On March 7, Act 2 opens with the administration revealing--- with great reluctance--- the annual "Cut List". On the Cut List will be programs that motivate our kids to excel at school, such as fine arts, extracurricular sports, environmental field trips, and classes for students with special talent. Also on the list will be staff positions that assist kids with special problems, such as choosing classes and colleges, overcoming difficult home circumstances, learning job skills, or having special educational needs. School custodians may again appear on the Cut List, but not central administrators. "We have no choice" is the theme of Act 2.

Act 2 also involves hundreds of "extras"-parents, teachers and concerned citizens-who will line up to tell the Board why it must reject the proposed cuts. Sometimes the Madison teachers union joins the chorus to demand a referendum.

In Act 3, known as the "Board Amendments", the Board strives mightily to close the gap. Board members propose higher and higher fees to prevent the cuts, not telling the public that the fees don't actually go to help the threatened programs. They just help balance the budget until next year. Act 3 ends after Board members have faced off to "save" some programs or staff by hiking fees, increasing costs for textbooks or gutting the emergency reserve for the coming year. Act 3 is our version of "The Survivor".

Act 4 act requires audience participation. Having again watched the Board discover the Budget Gap, react to the Cut List and fight over the Budget Amendments, the public is finally drawn onto the stage for the grand finale, the Referendum. In Act 4 the community divides into camps in preparation for voting, an unfortunate ending to the play, but one predestined by the Board's willingness to stick with last year's script rather than write a new one.

Call me an optimist, but I believe that the Board of Education could write a new play. It would begin by changing its role. For starters, the Board could stop granting employee wage and benefit increases that exceed the increases going to district tax-payers. It could direct administration to cease budgeting on a "same service" basis. It could require that expensive programs be evaluated for effectiveness. It could tell administration not to reject millions of federal dollars without Board consultation. It could cut back on outside contracting and "buy outs" of staff contracts. It could direct administration to aggressively pursue partnerships with the community to shore up the fine arts and extracurricular sports programs.

We'd still be struggling to fund high quality, comprehensive programs in the face of inadequate state and federal funding and over-reliance on the residential property tax. However, we might have a better chance of getting the community to come on stage in Act 1 to help us decide which programs make the most sense for our children and how to combine private and tax dollars to fund those programs.

Ruth Robarts

Madison School Board Member

Posted by Ruth Robarts at 08:26 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Upcoming Education Events

Our calendar is a useful place to checkout local education related events. There are several worthwhile events over the next few weeks (send yours in by clicking on the "Ideas" link at the top of our home page. We'll post it).

  • School Board Candidate Diversity Forum (MAFAAC) 3/12/2005 @ Edgewood. 5:00p.m. Maps, links and information here.
  • Gregg Underheim, candidate for Wisconsin State DPI Superintendent is holding a Public Forum at the Lakeview Branch of the Madison Public Library Wednesday March 9th at 6:00p.m. [Maps & Driving Directions] note: we'll of course post events for Underheim's opponent, incumbent Libby Burmaster as well
  • Arlene Silveira emails that several westside PTO's are sponsoring a Madison Schools Candidate Forum on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 at Cherokee Middle School [Map & Driving Directions] from 7 to 8:30p.m. [pdf flyer]

Posted by Jim Zellmer at 02:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Madison Schools Budget Change Information/Links

The Madison School District's Administration announced a series of 2005/2006 budget changes (eliminate some programs, reduce the increase in others, eliminate some positions). The overall budget will increase by about 10M+, from 316.8M in 2004/2005 to 327.7M in 2005/2006 (via Roger Price's recent budget presentation. [slides pdf]).

Read the District's introduction to the discussion items by clicking on the link below. This intro summarizes the priorities the Administration used to create the proposed budget changes (page 1 of the pdf link).

After 10 years of continually reducing services to our children and community, putting this budget together has been a difficult and heart wrenching experience for the Administration. We are long past the time that we can solve our revenue cap problems by being more efficient or eliminating things that are “nice but not necessary.”

This year’s budget cuts include things that all of us value, believe in and which make our District one of the best in the country. Placing these services on the reduction list has been the most difficult decision that the Management Team members have ever faced. The Team has been guided throughout the process by the Board of Education’s directive to utilize the District’s strategic plan in making its decisions. In addition to using the Strategic Priorities delineated in the Strategic Plan we utilized the Board of Education’s three goals in determining its priorities for making the service reductions:


  • All students complete 3rd grade reading at grade level or beyond.
  • All students complete Algebra by the end of 9th grade and Geometry by the end of 10th grade.
  • The district-wide attendance rate is at least 94%.

In keeping with these goals, we have sought first to protect the reading and mathematics instruction in our primary grades. Every effort has been made to keep small class sizes and to keep reading interventions, mathematics instruction and staff development focused on these first critical grades.

Research shows that children who are successful at this early stage of their education are successful learners throughout their K-12 experience.

Our next priority was to protect classroom instruction and safety in our middle and high schools. Although it was necessary to make some reductions in staff in these schools, we have protected the fundamental instructional needs and supported the measures necessary to maintain safety at each level.

Our decision to place the highest priority on these programs meets the Board of Education’s direction to follow the Board’s priorities and goals in making our recommendations. By prioritizing our limited resources to assure that children can successfully meet the Board’s goals, many other very important things must be reduced or eliminated. We recognize their importance and value but realize we can no longer keep them a reality in our district.

Every year, all of our staff are called on to give more to keep our children’s education sound. This year will be no different. The Board of Education will weigh our recommendations and make the final decisions that it feels are in the best interest of our students and our community. We wish the situation were different, but it is our reality.

Posted by Jim Zellmer at 10:44 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Superintendent Art Rainwater Proposes to Decimate Fine Arts: Turns Back on Curriculum and Academic Achievement Benefits of Fine Arts Education - Fails to Work with the Community, Year After Year

Superintendent Art Rainwater proposes (2005-2006 Budget Discussion Items)to cut another $1 million in elementary music and art education once again this year without any prior curriculum review and assessment of impact on children's learning and achievement - that would have involved teachers and the community.

MADISON SCHOOL BOARD CONTINUES TO IGNORE CHILDREN'S, PARENTS', TEACHERS' AND THE COMMUNITY'S REQUEST TO WORK TOGETHER TO EXPLORE ALTERNATIVE FINANCING STRATEGIES FOR FINE ARTS EVEN AS STUDIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE SHOWING THE POSITIVE IMPACTS ON ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT FOR LOW INCOME CHILDREN WHO HAVE A STRONG MUSIC, ART AND INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC INSTRUCTION IN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.

NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND IDENTIFIES FINE ARTS AS CORE CURRICULUM - IMPORTANT TO STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT, STUDENT INTEREST IN LEARNING AND IMPROVEMENT IN CHILDREN'S CREATIVITY.

Here's the Information:
Superintendent's Proposed Fine Arts Cuts - Released to MMSD Board of Education yesterday:

Eliminate elementary strings curriculum 9.8 FTEs $496,860
Double up Special classes in Grade 1 5-7.5 FTEs $253,500-$380,250
Total Impact on Fine Arts Curriculum 14.8-17.3 FTEs $750,367-$877,110

plus another $100,000 in instrument purchase and repair budget.

Total existing k-12 Fine Arts budget approximately $7 million which is 2% of the total budget. Superintendent Art Rainwater's proposed cut would eliminate 14% of the existing fine arts budget - 100% of the elementary string teachers who likely would be laid off as they are specialized and not easily transferred. They're also not administrators, none of whom are at risk of layoff.

History of Holding Hostage a Community that Values Music and Art Education:


Spring 2002 - Superintendent Art Rainwater proposes to cut 4th grade elementary strings course.
Community rallies - course reinstated.

Spring 2003 - - Superintendent Art Rainwater proposes to cut 4th grade string course if referendum fails unless fee imposed.
School Board approves all increases in fees if referendum fails EXCEPT the proposed fee for elementary string course.


Spring 2004 - Bill Keys explores $600 elementary string course fee, Bill Clingan proposes to cut Fine Arts Coordinator, Superintendent Rainwater increases elementary music and art section, Johnny Winston Jr. proposes $50 participation fee for elementary string course. Superintendent Rainwater cuts $70,000 instrument budget. All proposals passed.

Spring 2005 - Superintendent Art Rainwater proposes elimination of elementary strings course, elimination of string budget, elimination of instrument repair budget, doubling of class sizes for elementary music and art in grade 1.

Summary -
WI statutes set parameters for skill areas, but the statutes require the local School Board to approve curriculum. Our school board does not want to approve curriculum, saying we're not the experts. That's true but being an expert in a specific curriculum is not needed to ask the right "board appropriate" questions and to be sure that policies are followed and procedures are put in place to protect children's learning. Madison's school board has no written procedures for designing, implementing, evaluating and changing curriculum. Our school board, not the Superintendent, is responsible for overseeing what our children learn and the results of that learning.

Further, rather than listenting and responding to the community's value of fine arts education and researching the growing body of independent test results showing positive impacts on math and reading scores for low income children; our Superintendent, after another year of stonewalling requests from teachers and the community to form a working group to explore financial strategies; doesn't think that is necessary, yet wants us to believe he has to cut $8+ million and has no choice but to make the tough decisions. Hogwash. We want him to do the tough work - keep what contributes to academic achievement, madison values and what makes children's education worthwhile.

Posted by Barb Schrank at 12:52 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack