Budget/Financing, Elections, Governance/Board Decision Making, School Climate

A Few More 11/7/2006 Referendum Links

12 Comments
  • Support Smart Management: Wisconsin State Journal Editorial Board:

    Taxpayers in the Madison School District should demand that the School Board be smarter about managing the district’s money and resources.
    On Tuesday’s ballot is a school referendum containing three smart proposals.
    That’s why the referendum deserves voters’ support.
    More important than the referendum, however, is what happens next. The School Board is confronting difficult choices, including how to respond to rapid growth in areas where there are no schools while in other parts of the city, schools have excess space.
    A pivotal question in upcoming months will be: Does the board have the courage to close a school? While the rapidly growing Far West Side merits a new school, other parts of Madison are experiencing declining student populations.
    Taxpayers can’t afford to build schools where the children are while maintaining schools where the children aren’t.
    At least one school should eventually be closed and sold, with boundary changes to distribute children to other schools.

  • Another Referendum: WKOW-TV:

    This referendum is different from the last – it has one question, with three parts. In 2005, just one issue of a three-part question passed. Voters passed a plan for building renovations, but they said voted down a second school on the Leopold Elementary site, and to exceeding the revenue cap
    Monday night, spokesperson Ken Syke pointed out that since at 1993 no MMSD referendum has fully failed-at least one issue has always passed.

  • Don Severson & Vicki McKenna discuss the referendum question and a District email to MSCR users [mp3 audio]

Many more links here.

12 thoughts on “A Few More 11/7/2006 Referendum Links”

  1. It sure was good to see folks in both Madison and Janesville resoundingly supporting school referendums. Nice job by all who supported the MMSD effort!

  2. David:
    I was frankly astonished at the relatively modest level of debate and public visibility — for and against — of the MMSD school referendum. It just didn’t seem to generate much of the passion that has typified some past MMSD referendum. Yet it won in a walk. Thoughts as to why it won so handily? One idea: conventional wisdom in school circles suggested holding referendums on off-election days, on the theory that committed supporters will turn out regardless, while large turnout elections (those on regular election days) drive up opposition numbers, simply because more people vote. The MMSD and Janesville results suggest that may be changing. Or maybe it makes sense strategically to NOT have the school referendum be such a high-profile, stand-alone measure on the ballot. Or maybe it was just a very good night in general for Dems, and that spilled over to the MMSD referendum. Curious about yours and others thoughts.

  3. The paper reported support for our school referendum from around the City. I think that’s great news for Madison’s schools. Thank you to the School Board, and those who worked for and supported this referendum.

  4. Thank you also to the community members who worked on the long-range planning task forces. Great job!

  5. I think a lot of folks, as they begin to understand the nuances of school financing, are blaming state government and not local districts. So, they’re less likely to take out their ire on local districts. There was also a strong turnout for pro-school folks on the coat tails of the Dems in Madison. And the task force work, the willingness of MMSD to get the community involved in that process, helped. The CAST group ran a very positive campaign city-wide, which I personally was very happy to see. The differing factions on both sides of the Isthmus finally have some things in common. I for one sure hope things stay this way, and we still have room for improvement! Only one ward voted against the referendum, and that was in the town of Burke, where it was 1-0. I haven’t looked at the counts in detail, but even the northside voted YES this time….has that ever happened before?
    Another thing: there were no polarizing individuals involved this go around. They know who they are! Thanks to them for keeping their mouths shut and taking one for the team.
    All in all, I think it shows faith in our new school board’s ability to behave like adults, manage like managers, and address citizen concerns. But as many others have commented, we still have hard work ahead….

  7. Lots of interesting points. My 0.02:
    a) Posing the question on a major election date eliminates one past concern, spending $100k on special elections.
    b) New Board members; though we’ll see how that all plays out with respect to some of the upcoming controversial curriculum, budget and governance issues. The current Board can certainly no longer be thought of as a “rubber stamp”.
    c) The question did get lost (at least in terms of traditional media coverage) to a great degree with respect to the other races.
    d) The community task forces helped, though the Linden Park land purchase/task force timing was interesting.
    e) The start of substantive changes in health care costs.
    f) A much more low key approach by proponents.
    g) Voters have not yet received their property tax bills (notwithstanding all the loose election talk of various property tax “freeze” schemes). Spring elections follow tax bills and payments along with the annual drudgery of state and federal income taxes. Looking to state and federal funds to solve local K-12 problems pulls cash from the same people (us) a different way. State and federal spending priorities are certainly ripe for change.
    h) I think it’s important to space these questions out. Perhaps 24 months between spending questions?

  8. I voted no, for a four main reasons.
    The Wisconsin State Journal editorial puts one of my concerns forward when it asks, “Does the board have the courage to close a school?”
    I do not believe it does. I believe that one or several additional schools may have to be built in the next 10 years, and the board needed to demonstrate it could make some tough decisions before we go down this path. Because the board does not have the courage to close a school or two, the district will incur unnecessary costs that will cause further erosion in programs for all kids in the district.
    Second, the administration did not promise to support art and music programs by putting them off limits from cuts. We don’t need art and music rooms, if the administration is going insist on gutting these programs every year. Turn all that space over to classrooms and avoid building new space.
    Third, at least as far as I know, the administration did not promise to engage in an honest study of music and art programming with broad-based community participation.
    Fourth, education is much more than buildings. Stronger curriculum that is academically rigorous is a higher priority for me.
    I appreciate that we do need new schools, and money will be saved in transporation costs. It was a hard vote for me, and I didn’t decide until I got into the voting booth. I really do appreciate the effort of the citizen committees and the board, but I do not trust the administration. That’s why I ended up voting no.

  9. Hi Donald:
    Thanks for your comments.
    More will certainly vote no next time if your substantive questions, among others are not dealt with.
    Perhaps, given the annual Administration assault on strings, there will be extra classrooms available.

  11. Jim:
    fyi – many of the string classes are not taught in classrooms now, so no extra space there.
    Donald:
    I have seen no fine arts strategic planning since I’ve been on the board, and the community has been kept at arms length, which does not make any sense to me.
    The Performance and Achievement Committee and the Partnership Committee are “trying” to get a community fine arts committee going. Next Monday, the administration is making a presentation on Fine Arts education to the Performance and Achievement Committee at 6:15 p.m. I’ll have more comments for the blog after that meeting.
    In general, I do not believe financial and budget information is presented in a way that assesses the effect on other areas of the budget, especially academics. Basically, what are the trade-offs being made. No matter how tight the finances are, this is an important step in the budget planning/decisionmaking process, in my opinion.
    I voted yes, but I have concerns about the academic planning and directions as well as the financial management and oversight by the administration. I am encouraged by the new School Board members and their hard work on behalf of Madison’s children. Keeping a strong school board is important for our city’s public education.

Comments are closed.