Tim Culver, Superintendent
In the fall of 2014, I was visiting Oak Creek to determine whether to apply for the superintendency. When I toured the high school I was quite surprised that there was no performing arts center, or at minimum an auditorium, for such a large high school in a district and community with such a fine reputation in the arts. I was pleased to see that the November 2014 referendum included the potential for an auditorium (“Plan 1” - in my short-timer’s hindsight). I was puzzled and sad when I learned that part of the referendum failed. I was pleased that the auditorium question was being brought back to voters in April 2015 at considerable savings to taxpayers - a win-win it seemed (“Plan 2”). I was shocked and disappointed when I was told it failed again.
The next effort by the previous administration to overcome the second failure was to propose an auditorium “exterior shell-only” being built while the 9th grade center was under construction. By doing so there would be considerable cost savings. Since voters had not approved referendum funding, the proposal was to the fund the shell from the district’s reserve fund balance. In transition, I attended some Board meetings in the spring of 2015. There was passionate support expressed for this “Plan 3”. Being new to the community it was fascinating to watch the process. I admit I had a lot of wonderings sitting out there in the audience, particularly about Board Policy 610 Goal 7 and whether it would be possible to raise the “other $4M or so” to finish the inside of the shell at “some later date”. Several spoke of grants and community fundraisers, but it seemed to me another referendum would be inevitable (though that word was never used). How would that play out in this community given the recent past votes?
Regardless of my wonderings, based on a logical idea and good intentions, on June 8, 2015, the School Board adopted the following motion: " ...to approve commitment of up to $4.5 million in fund balance over two years for construction of auditorium shell as part of the new secondary school." That was one of the ‘marching orders’ I received on taking over as superintendent on July 1, 2015. We had to begin to plan this immediately, along with the two other complicated construction projects needing to break ground; and we did so.
The story of how and why “Plan 3” failed is included in my report to the School Board and community on April 11, 2016. I won’t restate those details again here. I am very sad about the loss of this important learning space for our students. In my point of view, without a public arts performance space for our children, our facilities are educationally inadequate compared to almost every other high school in this state. Also, I am humbled to have to stand here in my new community and acknowledge failure to accomplish the School Board’s adopted “Plan 3”. My career is about leading for children, and I have failed to achieve this opportunity for them. I am sorry that our best efforts were not adequate to resolve the fundamental barriers to this project.
However, failure’s purpose is to teach us how to get back up, dust ourselves off, and move forward by learning how to improve. So, here are things I will recommend to the School Board in the near future:
- PLAN. I believe we need to take a closer inventory of ALL our school facilities. The lack of a regular sized auditorium, while a glaring insufficiency, is not the only space that is inadequate or outdated or needing attention. We should review all school facilities and determine how each site is functioning, not only in terms of ongoing and deferred maintenance, but in terms of how the spaces meet the needs of our children in terms of the 21st century education they need. To create a long term (10 year?) “Educational Adequacy Facility Plan” will be a thoughtful, research-based process with wide stakeholder involvement and likely take at least a year or slightly more.
- VISION. Before the process above begins, we must frame such a review within a new strategic plan presently under development (look for a future blog/communication on how you can add your voice in the next month or so). We need a shared vision for what this community, wants, supports and expects of its schools for its children. This vision should drive a review of our facilities.
- FUNDING. Concurrently, as we develop an “Educational Adequacy Facility Plan” we should work and think proactively how to fund it. To be honest and transparent, at some point a referendum is likely inevitable to fund very high cost inadequacies, for example, an auditorium and some major energy/HVAC overhauls looming. But there are other options to consider in the meanwhile that could make us more agile and prepared, for example, creating and building up a Fund 46, Long-term Capital Improvement Trust Fund, to prepare for capital improvements. (Perhaps funded by the cell phone tower revenues?) This is a step the district has not yet taken. There are other financial planning tools and projections we should consider as well to create a whole picture of costs, benefits, and potential solutions so we can make informed long term and short term decisions.
I believe if we have a community vision for our children, a comprehensive plan, and a well thought out, cost effective proposal (with all details carefully sorted out up front) it would be supported by a majority of our community's taxpayers for the sake of our community's children. My experience has been that most people step up if they believe a proposed plan (Plan 4?) is “right”. The process of leading a community to this place of acceptance is challenging and must be done thoughtfully, transparently, and inclusively. I am willing to lead for children to get us there.
What do you think?
