Story originally printed in the La Crosse Tribune or online at www.lacrossetribune.com
Published - Sunday, March 23, 2008
Four up for three seats on La Crosse School Board
Three incumbents and a long-time educator will square off April 1 for three seats on the La Crosse School Board.
First-time candidate Dave Rudolph will attempt to oust either Connie Troyanek, Steve Kopp or Bill Oldenburg.
Rudolph retired from the La Crosse School District in 2000 and wants to represent the average citizen and taxpayer on the school board.
Troyanek, who serves as board vice president, first was elected in 1996. Kopp was appointed to the board in 2003 and elected in 2004. Oldenburg seeks his second board term.
The four candidates see the $35 million building referendum and $4.17 million five-year operating referendum questions, also on the April 1 ballot, as the biggest issues facing the district.
The three incumbents strongly support the board’s decision to present the measures to voters April 1, while Rudolph said it is not the “appropriate” time to ask the community to decide.
Rudolph cited the new La Crosse County Jail, Bliss Road repairs and rising gas prices among his reasons.
Independent consultants said the district has $112 million in facility needs, but the board knew “that amount is not affordable by the community, so priorities were set,” Troyanek said.
“The board has looked at a ton of problems, and we’re bringing out our best solution,” Kopp said.
To Oldenburg, the reasons are simple: safety and shelter.
“Students should not be in classrooms where they have an arctic climate one day and are in the tropics the next,” he said.
If the public approves it, the building referendum would add $63 in school property taxes on a $100,000 house. The operating referendum would cost the owner of a $100,000 home an average of $91 annually in property taxes over five years. But the current $3.52 million operating referendum that expires in the 2008-09 school year added an average of $99 on a $100,000 house, so the net result would be a $8 drop in taxes if approved.
Contact Autumn Grooms at (608) 791-8424 or agrooms@ lacrossetribune.com.
Steve Kopp
ADDRESS: W5236 Knobloch Road
AGE: 54
NUMBER OF YEARS LIVED IN LA CROSSE: 16
FAMILY: Wife Lynnetta, one son
EDUCATION: University of Wisconsin-La Crosse; University of Northern Iowa
OCCUPATION: Information Technology
ELECTED OFFICES HELD, COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES AND MEMBERSHIPS: La Crosse School Board, appointed in 2003, elected to one-year term in 2004 and re-elected to 3-year term in 2005; Board of Control CESA No. 4, 2004 to Present; Chair Legislative Committee, La Crosse School Board, 2006 to Present; La Crosse Valley View Rotary Club, 2006 to Present; Community Co-Chair, American Lung Association, La Crosse Asthma Walk 2006 and 2007; 3rd Congressional District Advocacy Captain, Arthritis Foundation Wisconsin Chapter; Wisconsin Association of School Boards, 2004 to Present; and National Association of School Boards, 2004 to Present.
POLITICAL STATEMENT: I’ve learned that just about every issue we examine at the board table has many complex facets, and the decisions we make will impact the whole community. I try hard to see all sides of every issue, and I’ll do whatever I think is right for kids even if I know there’ll be some backlash.
Serving on the school board is the ultimate futurist challenge. What this community will look like in 12 years is largely based on the type of citizen the schools turn out.
Q. What are the two most pressing issues facing the La Crosse School District, and what do you think the school board should do about them?
A. The two most pressing issues ARE the two referendum questions that voters will either vote yes or no on in April. The board has looked at a ton of problems, and we’re bringing out our best solution.
Q. Do you support or oppose the $35 million building referendum — $20 million for safety and “urgent facility” needs, plus heating and air conditioning, at 14 district buildings as well as a new $15 million elementary school that would combine Franklin Elementary School and Roosevelt Elementary/Coulee Montessori Schools at the Franklin site — that will be on the April 1 ballot?
A. Strongly support. Every school in the district has unique needs, and the referendum question posed above will only solve a few very critical issues. First of all, we have declining enrollment in our schools, and it’s a little more pronounced at Roosevelt and Franklin. Eventually, it’s just going to be completely inefficient to run both schools. We have space to build at Franklin, and it has structural issues that we believe won’t make it a good remodeling project. I’m very concerned about the design of our older schools which in this day and age make it more difficult for our staff to keep the schools safe with blind entry ways, doors that can’t be locked from inside the room, a lack of emergency smoke and fire sensors.
Q. Are you satisfied with only having one $35 million building referendum question?
A. Very satisfied. The board discussed carving the question into more parts, but decided the issues are not mutually exclusive.
Q. Do you support or oppose the $4.175 million 5-year operating referendum that too will be on the April 1 ballot?
A. Strongly support. Our costs go up about 4.2 percent a year because of the QEO. We cannot raise revenues beyond 2 percent a year without a referendum. The only way to avoid the issue would be to cut programs substantially, and increase class sizes.
Q. Do you support keeping SAGE in all the school district’s elementary schools?
A. Strongly support. Research has shown the small class size improves student achievement; and SAGE allows us to keep classes small. One message we keep getting from parents is that they value smaller class sizes in La Crosse Schools and see this as a priority for the district to preserve.
Q. How satisfied are you with the decision to switch school bus providers?
A. Satisfied. It appears the decision will save the district about $200,000 a year over the next five years. Three Rivers’ bid was 15 percent higher.
Q. Do you support or oppose charging fees for co-curricular activities at La Crosse School District schools?
A. Support. I used to think charging fees was a good idea, until I started actually talking to coaches, students, teachers, and activities directors. We have 30 to 40 percent of our high school kids in La Crosse that are on free and reduced lunch. If they can’t afford lunch, then I know they’re not going to find $300 to play football or compete in musical competitions. Co-curricular activities are a big part of the school experience, and I think it’s important every kid gets an equal chance to compete, and learn how to play on a team.
Connie L. Troyanek
ADDRESS: 2726 Shelby Road
AGE: 54
NUMBER OF YEARS LIVED IN LA CROSSE: 48
FAMILY: Husband, Gary; three daughters.
EDUCATION: Attended Emerson, Lincoln and Central; graduated from Viterbo University with a BSN.
OCCUPATION: School Nurse with the West Salem School District.
ELECTED OFFICES HELD, COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES AND MEMBERSHIPS: La Crosse School Board, 1996 to present, serving as Treasurer from 1998 to 2004 and Vice President from 2004 to present; Wisconsin School Nurse Association Board of Directors, 2007 to 2008; Member Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, Sunday School teacher from 1987 to 2001; Riverland Girl Scouts Board of Directors, Currently Corporate Secretary; District Wide Parent Committee, member since 1993; Past member of La Crosse Public Education Foundation; Member Wisconsin Nurses Association; National School Nurse Association; Wisconsin School Nurse Association; Member Viterbo University School of Nursing Advisory Council
POLITICAL STATEMENT: My family and I have benefited greatly from the La Crosse community and I feel I need to give back. I have enjoyed my terms on the La Crosse School Board and believe we have done a lot of good work. I also believe there is work left to be done, and would like to continue to endeavor to help make the La Crosse School District the best in the Wisconsin, if not in the country.
Q. What are the two most pressing issues facing the La Crosse School District, and what do you think the school board should do about them?
A. I believe that the most pressing issue facing the La Crosse School District, as well as the rest of the state, is budgets. With one state law stating that school districts must offer a 3.8 percent package increase to employees and another state law stating that school districts can not increase it's revenue by an average of no more than 2.3 percent, school districts are having difficulty maintaining quality programs. Many districts, including our own, are needing to go to the community via referendums in order to meet the budget needs of the district. Until the State Legislature changes the way public schools are funded, districts will need to seek creative ways to supplement the budget. I believe that partnering with community business and institutes of higher education is one way to meet that goal. I also believe that continually meeting with and talking with our legislators about changing the funding formula is paramount.
Another pressing issue facing the La Crosse School District is addressing the educational needs of children in the 21st century. In La Crosse we have started looking at the technological needs, international/global learning needs, achievement gaps, literacy issues and math and science needs of students. Our curriculum staff has developed ideas for new programs that include career-based learning, global education, at-risk options, and online learning.
Q. Do you support or oppose the $35 million building referendum — $20 million for safety and "urgent facility" needs, plus heating and air conditioning, at 14 district buildings as well as a new $15 million elementary school that would combine Franklin Elementary School and Roosevelt Elementary/Coulee Montessori Schools at the Franklin site — that will be on the April 1 ballot?
A. Strongly support. I strongly support the facility needs referendum. The district was told by independent consultants that there were $112 million in facility needs. That amount is not affordable by the community, so priorities were set. There are many issues that need to be taken care of. Two schools have boilers that are almost 70 years old. (When they were installed, they were coal burning.) Four more schools have boilers that are 48 to 55 years old. It is nearly impossible to obtain parts for these old boilers when they are needed. These boilers need to be replaced.
We also have buildings that the primary entrance is not visible from the office. In this time of increased security needs, having people be able to enter a building without anyone seeing them is a major concern. Other items include updating the fire alarm system, changing locks on classroom doors to make them lock from the inside, install intrusion alarm systems in the schools, install a security camera system in the schools, improve student drop-off areas to make them safe, and remodel the kitchens at State Road Elementary, Lincoln Middle, and Longfellow Middle.
I also strongly support the consolidation of Franklin and Roosevelt into one new school. Franklin was built in 1955 using Sheffield Tiles. This material was found to not be very sturdy, and in the 1980s steel beams were inserted into the building's structure to help hold the building up. The building itself, is not conducive to learning. The population of students on the North Side of La Crosse has also declined. Some grades do not have enough students to make full classes so are combined with another grade. This also is not an ideal learning environment for our children. In order to be more cost effective, the La Crosse School District would like to build an environmentally friendly school on the Franklin site. (This would reduce staff costs by $410,000 per year.) The school would be within walking distance for all students that attend it, so no bussing costs would be added. The Franklin site was chosen as it is bigger, it is closest to the majority of students, it is central to the North Side community and Roosevelt School would be more attractive to potential buyers. A new elementary school would also improve property values in the Franklin neighborhood.
Q. Are you satisfied with only having one $35 million building referendum question?
A. Very satisfied. I am very satisfied with the decision to have only one building referendum question. If we had two questions, they are linked together. If the safety and security portion of the question would pass, but not the consolidation portion, then we would need an additional $4.5 million to make repairs at Roosevelt and Franklin. Also, if the consolidation portion passed and other portion did not, the district would not be able to adequately address the safety, security and facility needs of the other buildings.
Q. Do you support or oppose the $4.175 million 5-year operating referendum that too will be on the April 1 ballot?
A. Strongly support. I strongly support the operating referendum because it is needed to continue the quality programs our district offers. The current operating referendum that the La Crosse community voted for in 2004 expires next year. Without it, the district will need to cut approximately $4.5 million from the budget in the following year (2009 -2010 school year) and significant budget cuts every year after that. Since the budget is almost 85 percent personnel that is where the biggest cut will have to be. La Crosse has decreased staff by 84 positions since 2003. We have saved over $2 million in energy costs in the last few years.
Q. Do you support keeping SAGE in all the school district's elementary schools?
A. Strongly support. I strongly support keeping SAGE in all the school district's elementary schools. It has been proven that low class size is essential in the early grades (Pre-K through 3rd grade) to maximize student success. Keeping class size to an average of 1 teacher per 15 students allows the teacher to be able to spend time with all students. Many students have special needs and require more attention from teachers than they did in the past. Low class sizes in Kindergarten through 3rd grade allow children to begin to build a strong foundation to their learning when it is so crucial.
Q. How satisfied are you with the decision to switch school bus providers?
A. Very satisfied. I am very satisfied with the decision to switch school bus providers. The district was unable to come to an acceptable financial agreement with the current provider of school bussing. The contract was put out for bids and the company with the lowest bid was chosen. It happens to be the same bus company (with local management) that supplied excellent bussing services to the district for 17 years. (They just have a new name.)
Q. Do you support or oppose charging fees for co-curricular activities at La Crosse School District schools?
A. Oppose. I currently oppose charging fees for co-curricular activities at La Crosse School District schools. It has been well-documented that students involved in co-curricular activities (whether it be athletics, music or club-based activities) do much better academically. With 40 percent of students eligible for free and reduced lunch, I am afraid that if we started charging for activities, some kids may not be able to participate. Not all students are able to excel academically, but may excel at music or athletics. Belonging to a club may be a way for a student to be accepted. Taking these opportunities away from students could be detrimental to them. However, if the district is unable to pass an operating referendum, it may become necessary to decrease activities or to charge for them.
Bill Oldenburg
ADDRESS: 2442 Smith Valley Road
AGE: 49
NUMBER OF YEARS LIVED IN LA CROSSE: 44
FAMILY: Married, one daughter
EDUCATION: Attended Hamilton Elementary and Lincoln Middle schools, graduated from Central High School. Bachelor of Science with additional graduate study, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse; also attended Marquette University.
OCCUPATION: Commercial Sales, The Company Store/Hanover Direct.
ELECTED OFFICES HELD, COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES AND MEMBERSHIPS: La Crosse School Board member 2005 to present; La Crosse Public Education Foundation Board Member, 2002 to present; District-Wide Parent Committee, 2000 to 2005.
POLITICAL STATEMENT: I have been on the school board three short years. If reelected, I will continue to help develop policies that promote quality education for all students. Financial accountability is also vital. I favor policies that give the board a greater role in the auditing process. On the board, I try to be a good listener and respond promptly to constituent needs. I welcome the opportunity to serve as an even more independent voice on the board.
Q. What are the two most pressing issues facing the La Crosse School District, and what do you think the school board should do about them?
A. The most pressing issue is one of inadequate state funding. Fourteen years ago, the Wisconsin State Legislature adopted a funding formula that does not work and leaves us in a financial bind. It requires that every year we spend on average 4 percent more, while only taking in additional revenue of 2 percent. This creates a continual crisis for many school districts. I do not believe that the state legislature or governor will come to the rescue.
At a panel forum at this years State School Board convention, the legislators scheduled for the event did not even show up. The next day, our governor, also did not appear for his scheduled address to the group. He sent a video instead. Clearly, the education of our children is not at the top of the state priority list.
Our problems must be solved locally. One step is to cut costs and reduce spending when possible. Our district has done this. The most recent Wisconsin Taxpayer Alliance report shows that the School District of La Crosse has contained costs when compared to similar districts. Passing the two referendums is another step in finding a local solution.
The second most pressing and perhaps even more troubling issue is that of generational poverty. As a district, we provide breakfast and lunch at schools, but we cannot be the parents of those children, who are abandoned, unfed, or who have few social skills. We can, however, educate the public as to the unique and very deep problems, which can exist for some of our students.
Q. Do you support or oppose the $35 million building referendum — $20 million for safety and “urgent facility” needs, plus heating and air conditioning, at 14 district buildings as well as a new $15 million elementary school that would combine Franklin Elementary School and Roosevelt Elementary/Coulee Montessori Schools at the Franklin site — that will be on the April 1 ballot?
A. Strongly support. The reasons are simple: safety and shelter. We need new lighting, cameras, and secure entryways to help make our schools safe and secure places. We also need to replace old heating systems, which include extremely old boilers. Students should not be in classrooms where they have an arctic climate one day and are in the tropics the next. Also, these problems are far cheaper to fix now. Buildings, which have some of the most urgent needs, are Franklin and Roosevelt. Consolidating these schools and constructing a new building pays for itself in 20 years.
Q. Are you satisfied with only having one $35 million building referendum question?
A. Very satisfied. We have two old buildings, which need major repairs and have shrinking enrollments. The best solution is to build a new school now. Having a third question would not be offering what is in the best interests of the district.
Q. Do you support or oppose the $4.175 million 5-year operating referendum that too will be on the April 1 ballot?
A. Strongly support. This referendum is essential if we wish to provide quality education. A “no” vote would result in larger classes and fewer course choices — options that our kids need to compete in the global economy.
Q. Do you support keeping SAGE in all the school district’s elementary schools?
A. Strongly support. SAGE is now offered in most but not all of our elementary schools. Our charters, for example, do not have SAGE. I do support SAGE because it makes a smaller class size possible at the lower grades. Smaller class size has been linked to greater reading and math scores.
Q. How satisfied are you with the decision to switch school bus providers?
A. Very satisfied. This was an administrative decision that should save the district $1 million in the next five years.
Q. Do you support or oppose charging fees for co-curricular activities at La Crosse School District schools?
A. Strongly oppose. I strongly oppose charging co-curricular fees. Participation is already limited slightly due to the cost of equipment, clothing, supplies and travel expenses that parents must provide. Co-curriculars are optional and yet can be the deciding factor in a college admission or scholarship award. I would rather have some activities eliminated than have fees imposed.
Dave Rudolph
ADDRESS: 3406 33rd St. S.
AGE: 66
NUMBER OF YEARS LIVED IN LA CROSSE: 66
FAMILY: Wife, Sandy; three children; two granddaughters
EDUCATION: Bachelor of Science, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, 1966; Master of Science in reading education, UW-La Crosse, 1974; and an additional 30 credits.
OCCUPATION: Retired educator, 1966-2000
ELECTED OFFICES, COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES AND MEMBERSHIPS: Member Holy Trinity Catholic Church; Rotary Lights volunteer 2001
POLITICAL STATEMENT: I want to represent the average citizen and taxpayer. I have always taken a sincere interest in education and I feel I can make a difference. I believe that the school district can do a better job of cutting costs by policing itself. While I have great respect for school administration, I do not always feel they do enough to cut costs and ease the tax burden on taxpayers in this district.
QUESTION AND ANSWER WITH DAVE RUDOLPH
Q. What are the two most pressing issues facing the La Crosse School District, and what do you think the school board should do about them?
A. The school referendum — I feel that this is not the appropriate time to ask the community to decide. We are building a new jail and fixing Bliss Road. Trane Company was just sold, the brewery is asking its workers to make concessions, gas prices and economic costs are rising and we are in a recession. This is not the time to ask taxpayers for more money. Also, I believe the safety and security issues should be a separate referendum and that cuts should be made for requests that the schools can do without. Since the operating budget still has a year to run ( a 5-year operating budget was passed in 2004) maybe this can wait until next year. The big problem is how schools are funded in Wisconsin. Property taxes are high enough, but unfortunately the schools are dependent on property taxes. I think changes have to be made in Madison so that schools throughout the state can operate properly without further burdening the taxpayers.
Q. Do you support or oppose the $35 million building referendum — $20 million for safety and “urgent facility” needs, plus heating and air conditioning, at 14 district buildings as well as a new $15 million elementary school that would combine Franklin Elementary School and Roosevelt Elementary/Coulee Montessori Schools at the Franklin site — that will be on the April 1 ballot?
A. Oppose. The taxpayers in the school district can not afford this proposal at this time. Student success is determined by many things. While a proper learning environment is important, the teachers probably have the greatest influence on a child's success. La Crosse is blessed with a great teaching staff.
Q. Are you satisfied with only having one $35 million building referendum question?
A. Very unsatisfied. Safety and security needs are too important to be tied to building a new school. The reason given for combining these two issues is that a new school will cost closer to $18 million than the proposed $ 15 million and if these are part of the same referendum question the school district can borrow from safety and security needs to pay for the new school. If there is padding in the safety and security budget , that padding should be stripped and the voters should deal with safety and security separately. If a new school will cost $ 17.9 million say that up front and let the voters decide.
Q. Do you support or oppose the $4.175 million 5-year operating referendum that too will be on the April 1 ballot?
A. Support. I can support an operating budget if it is necessary. I’d like to have a very detailed explanation of how this money will be spent. Since the present operating referendum does not run out until 2009 this question should be deferred for another year.
Q. Do you support keeping SAGE in all the school district’s elementary schools?
A. Strongly support. As a K-12 reading specialist, I understand the importance of smaller class sizes for children in the primary grades. The SAGE program reduces class size for children in the primary grades. It is a good program.
Q. How satisfied are you with the decision to switch school bus providers?
A. Very satisfied. I think the district is acting responsibly to keep costs down. We need to go with the lowest bidder.
Q. Do you support or oppose charging fees for co-curricular activities at La Crosse School District schools?
A. Oppose. We’ve done this before and it is not fair to many students in this school district. It adversely effects low income families.
All stories copyright 2000 - 2006 La Crosse Tribune and other attributed sources.