A recent survey of superintendents, released by the Wisconsin Education Association Council and the Wisconsin Association of School District Administrators, told us something we already know.
We have a broken school funding system in Wisconsin.
The Marshfield School District and their Yes Committee made that clear when they pointed their fingers at Madison and told us that's where the problem is.
The revenue caps were passed as legislation over 15 years ago. So what has the Marshfield School District done to help fix this broken funding system? We know they work hard to get referendums on the ballot and make sure they pass. Marshfield taxpayers have been socked with 3 passing referendum in the past 4 years for a total of over $40 million. But "these extra dollars only fix the problem temporarily and put extra strain on taxpayers."
Instead of waiting until the next referendum is on the ballot (and we all know there is one coming soon because Bruce King himself said the district will be back if things don't change in Madison) Marshfield citizens and taxpayers should be asking questions now. What has our school district done to help fix the broken funding system? What is their long-term plan? Are more referendums the only answer? How high will Marshfield's property taxes be raised by the school district over the next 5 years?
The Marshfield School District, their Yes Committee, and the Board of Education are all good at pointing their fingers at Madison. But now, thanks to Marshfield School Watch, the taxpayers of Marshfield are pointing one finger at Madison and one finger at Marshfield and saying that the school funding system is broken on both ends.
Call or write the Superintendent. Call or write your elected school board members. (Click here for their contact information: http://www.marshfield.k12.wi.us/IntroductionOfBoardMember.cfm). Let them know you are concerned about the broken school funding system in Madison AND in Marshfield and ask them what they are going to do about it. Let them know that you will not support another school referendum if that's their only answer. Hold them accountable for finding a long-term solution to the problem---not just another "temporary fix" at taxpayer's expense.
Check out the Marshfield School Watch web site for more information: http://www.marshfieldschoolwatch.org/
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Kiggens-Leifheit now admits she might have a conflict of interest!
The Marshfield News Herald reported this the day after the election:
"A potential conflict of interest may arise for Kiggens-Leifheit, who is a substitute teacher in the district and the director of Pathway Partners, a non-profit student mentoring program in the high school. She said she discussed the issue with school district administration prior to filing candidacy and will now be contacting a school board attorney for advice."
The good thing is, Kiggens-Leifheit finally admits that she needs to consult with a lawyer and clear this whole "conflict of interest" thing up.
What's disturbing, however, is the fact that she discussed the issue with school district administration prior to filing candidacy and they either 1) don't know the State statutes regarding conflict of interest or 2) they didn't care and just ignored it hoping no one would notice.
Fortunately, someone did notice---the Marshfield School Watch group. This admission by Kiggens-Leifheit was the first public response by her or the school district amidst repeated attempts by Marshfield School Watch to get them to address the issue before the election.
Some community members posting on the Marshfield News-Herald blog expressed their concerns:
Marshfield School Watch vows to stay on this and follow it to conclusion. Stay posted!
"A potential conflict of interest may arise for Kiggens-Leifheit, who is a substitute teacher in the district and the director of Pathway Partners, a non-profit student mentoring program in the high school. She said she discussed the issue with school district administration prior to filing candidacy and will now be contacting a school board attorney for advice."
The good thing is, Kiggens-Leifheit finally admits that she needs to consult with a lawyer and clear this whole "conflict of interest" thing up.
What's disturbing, however, is the fact that she discussed the issue with school district administration prior to filing candidacy and they either 1) don't know the State statutes regarding conflict of interest or 2) they didn't care and just ignored it hoping no one would notice.
Fortunately, someone did notice---the Marshfield School Watch group. This admission by Kiggens-Leifheit was the first public response by her or the school district amidst repeated attempts by Marshfield School Watch to get them to address the issue before the election.
Some community members posting on the Marshfield News-Herald blog expressed their concerns:
- One would have thought Kiggens-Leifeit and administration would have contacted an attorney for the school board prior to filing papers for running for school board. Makes you wonder if they thought they could get away with it. Will she also have to leave substitute teaching for the district and the Yes committee as well?
- The reason Kiggens-Leifeit or the school district did not confer with a lawyer before she ran for the board was because she and the school district did not see her employment with the district as a conflict of interest. But Marshfield School Watch called her on it. Good to know it will be looked into. We need a Board of Education that follows the law. If it wasn't for Marshfield School Watch, this issue would have never come up.
Marshfield School Watch vows to stay on this and follow it to conclusion. Stay posted!
Alternative candidates for School Board get noticed!
The votes have been counted. While Bohon and Kiggens-Leifheit won seats on the board, it wasn't without a fight.
Candidate Christine Miller received 1,562 votes, the most she has ever received since she began running for school board in 1995. Amidst controversial views as a holocaust denier and an untiring crusade to have a series of revisionist books added to public school libraries, she still manages to rack up a sizable amount of votes. The only possible reason: many taxpayers in Marshfield agreed with her stand against the school districts parade of referendums, 3 in the past 4 years alone, that have raised property taxes over $40 million dollars. It was Miller's platform of local and state school budget reform that made taxpayers take notice.
Doug Seubert, founder and Executive Director of Marshfield School Watch, received 236 votes. This is quite an accomplishment, as Seubert never declared a formal write-in campaign. In fact, there was only one letter to the editor published just four days before the election by a concerned community member, who stated he was writing in Seubert for school board because, he said, "the two present school board members running had a chance to save taxpayers' money but instead pushed for an excessive referendum that will come back to haunt us."
His letter continued, "Doug has many good ideas and it's too bad that the school board has their own agenda which doesn't include an open discussion except among themselves. But they seem to make an exception when they want your money."
236 voters agreed with the letter and kept it in mind as they voted four days later. That's very impressive seeing as they had to remember to write in Seubert's name. Many write-in campaigns fail because often voters do not take the extra step to write in a candidate, much less one who never even declared a formal write-in campaign, advertised, or even asked for anyone to vote for him.
What does this say about the current school board? What does this say about Bohon and Kiggens-Leifheit? Obviously there are people who were not happy with the choice of candidates and they clearly want changes to how the district does business.
It certainly gives some credibility to the Marshfield School Watch group, and Seubert in particular. People are beginning to wake up and take notice. And that has to be somewhat annoying to a school district that has for so long operated under the radar and outside of the spotlight of dissatisfied taxpayers.
The times they are a changin' ....
Related Links:
Candidate Christine Miller received 1,562 votes, the most she has ever received since she began running for school board in 1995. Amidst controversial views as a holocaust denier and an untiring crusade to have a series of revisionist books added to public school libraries, she still manages to rack up a sizable amount of votes. The only possible reason: many taxpayers in Marshfield agreed with her stand against the school districts parade of referendums, 3 in the past 4 years alone, that have raised property taxes over $40 million dollars. It was Miller's platform of local and state school budget reform that made taxpayers take notice.
Doug Seubert, founder and Executive Director of Marshfield School Watch, received 236 votes. This is quite an accomplishment, as Seubert never declared a formal write-in campaign. In fact, there was only one letter to the editor published just four days before the election by a concerned community member, who stated he was writing in Seubert for school board because, he said, "the two present school board members running had a chance to save taxpayers' money but instead pushed for an excessive referendum that will come back to haunt us."
His letter continued, "Doug has many good ideas and it's too bad that the school board has their own agenda which doesn't include an open discussion except among themselves. But they seem to make an exception when they want your money."
236 voters agreed with the letter and kept it in mind as they voted four days later. That's very impressive seeing as they had to remember to write in Seubert's name. Many write-in campaigns fail because often voters do not take the extra step to write in a candidate, much less one who never even declared a formal write-in campaign, advertised, or even asked for anyone to vote for him.
What does this say about the current school board? What does this say about Bohon and Kiggens-Leifheit? Obviously there are people who were not happy with the choice of candidates and they clearly want changes to how the district does business.
It certainly gives some credibility to the Marshfield School Watch group, and Seubert in particular. People are beginning to wake up and take notice. And that has to be somewhat annoying to a school district that has for so long operated under the radar and outside of the spotlight of dissatisfied taxpayers.
The times they are a changin' ....
Related Links:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
