Wichita School Bond Issue News and Opinion

Recent debates with school bond proponents have been enlightening. Proponents offer no concrete evidence that the $370 million bond proposal will raise test scores or lessen dropout rates. While low-achievement problems are not unique to Wichita, they are ours, locally, to deal with.

In the spring of this year:

• Two of every five of the district's 11th-graders could not read at grade level (Flint Hills Center for Public Policy).

• Five of the seven Wichita high schools failed to make "adequate yearly progress" (Kansas State Department of Education).

• Reading and math scores were 13.5 and 15 percentage points lower than state averages (Flint Hills).

• USD 259 was the lowest-ranked district out of 26 in Sedgwick, Harvey and Butler counties (state).

These are but a few of the disappointing statistics that warrant consideration despite recent information by the district that middle school AYP results have risen. As Denise Seguine, chief academic officer for USD 259, told The Eagle when the AYP improvements were released, "We have a long ways to go to 100 percent. The work we need to do is in instruction."

At a recent Pachyderm Club-sponsored public debate, bond proponent Sarah Olson argued that new athletic facilities and buildings will help her, as a real estate agent, sell more houses. Board president Lynn Rogers attempted to make the case that parents and students will take more pride in going to school if facilities are nicer.

The motivation of proponents is misplaced. Schools with strong academic credentials help sell houses and instill pride.

Despite the bulk of evidence that class size is not a determining factor in student achievement, Rogers has argued otherwise. When pressed for evidence, he suggested searching "class size reduction" on Google.

It is difficult to be persuaded by the reasoning of proponents.

Shiny and new is not what parents demand. Parents want two things: a strong academic environment and safety for their kids. They don't choose a school because it has a new football stadium or swimming pool. It is not bricks and mortar that will sustain these kids through life. They need the tools to read, write, function mathematically and reason.

It is unfortunate that despite some real needs in USD 259, voters are offered an all-or-nothing package. It would have been prudent to break the bond into several categories as opposed to one take-it-or-leave-it question.

There is a need for a new northeast high school, estimated to cost $37 million, but currently the only way to get it is to approve spending another $333 million.

It also would be prudent to wait until a new superintendent is hired so that he or she can assess what the crucial needs are and how best to address them with regard to USD 259's educational offerings.

Both presidential candidates acknowledged last week that despite spending more money per pupil than any other developed nation, America lags far behind. Both agreed reform is needed. According to the educational documentary "Flunked," sound reform costs little or nothing to implement and sustain.

Let's get started. It's a win-win situation for the children and the community.

I have been a stockbroker specializing in tax-advantaged investing for more than 25 years. Right now nationally there is a very thin market for municipal bonds.

As a result, the pricing is such that municipal bond funds are yielding well over 6 percent. If you bring a new bond issue to market in this climate, it will cost 50 percent more in interest than it would have six months ago. But nobody seems to be talking about that.

I say delay the vote on the school bond issue until next year, when the new superintendent is hired, new board members are elected in April, and the economy is settled. Perhaps the extra time will also give the opportunity to prune that wish list and find other solutions.

LYNDA TYLER
Wichita

October 8, 2008
Shelters not a need

The appeal for school storm shelters is a clear example of the inability of politicians and civic leaders to differentiate between real needs and irrational, emotionally driven ones ("Protect: Safe rooms save lives," Sept. 29 editorial).

To my knowledge, no schoolchildren have been killed by storms hitting Kansas schools in the past 50 years. The appeal for storm shelters, therefore, is predominantly an emotional one. But that's not the point, now is it? The point is to coerce the taxpayers into voting for the whole bond issue -- $370 million -- so they don't feel guilty about voting down the $60 million shelters.

Obviously, no one wants to see schoolchildren get hurt, even if the magnitude of the perceived threat is statistically small. So what's the solution? Start school two days earlier, and on the rare days that severe storms are a realistic threat, cancel school. Additionally, parents can use their own discretion and keep their kids home whenever they deem it necessary. There -- I just saved $60 million.

STEVE W. CARTWRIGHT
Derby

October 7, 2008
Be students' hero

The average American student is no longer able to compete academically. In Kansas, nearly 6 of 10 eighth-grade students have substandard math skills, nearly half are not good readers, and 4 of 10 students fail to graduate from high school, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

These fundamental skills are crucial in today's workplace and economy, and recent studies indicate American students are falling far behind students in other countries.

But all is not lost. Student performance can be increased, and there are plenty of heroes out there who can lead the charge. The people showcased in the documentary "Flunked," which will be shown at 6 p.m. Wednesday at the Orpheum Theatre, tell their stories of perseverance and how they changed the lives of students in their communities.

Kansas is full of potential all-stars. We have many dedicated, hardworking teachers, principals and parents. We can increase student performance in Kansas and become a competitor in the world economy.

Let's come together and find a way to make this change happen.

SARAH McINTOSH

Vice president of programs
Flint Hills Center for Public Policy
Wichita

October 6, 2008
Elderly and bond

While placing "vote no" signs in the yards of citizens who requested them, I had a chance to visit with these people about the proposed $370 million school bond issue. These people are elderly and on fixed incomes. With the financial debacle that has devastated their retirement savings, they are not able to shoulder additional taxes that would result from passage of the bond.

Why should retired and low-income people be subjected to this additional burden when many of them are wondering how they are going to buy groceries and pay their utilities, not to mention gasoline?

No one is against our young people, but with more than $12,000 in spending per student, it seems that USD 259 has plenty to work with, if it would simply manage the money with the stewardship these low-income people have to practice just to survive.

GREG DYE
Wichita

October 5, 2008
Cheaper options

An Eagle editorial discussed the lifetime benefits of arts and athletic facilities upgrades and the many inequities within USD 259 ("Their turn: Athletics, arts need bond issue," Sept. 21 Opinion).

Bond opponents agree that music, art and athletics are important disciplines. The disagreement comes as to how these opportunities should be funded. Many strapped school districts realize the monetary futility of trying to provide each school with equal facilities and have turned to their communities' public and private existing facilities. Operating costs are shared, and facilities are utilized. To my knowledge, this school board has done nothing to explore alternatives, which is a disservice to its constituency.

Has the district considered east- and west-side sports complexes that each would include a regulation 25-meter pool, a large football stadium and an Olympic-size track, rather than push for all of these facilities at individual schools?

The thing that bothers me the most about this entire bond proposal is the mindset that believes, despite a very tight economy, that it's OK to spend money we don't have, as opposed to finding less-expensive solutions. I suggest that would be a real lifetime lesson to teach our children.

MIKE BRINCEFIELD
Wichita

October 4, 2008
Bond excuse faulty

An Eagle article masked the facts in reporting a 1 percent increase in USD 259 enrollment (Sept. 26 Eagle). It spent quite a bit of time focusing on Chisholm Trail Elementary School as having an increase of 112 students. Well, fortunately for Chisholm, the school has a capacity for 600 students, according to the district's Web site, so the 576 heads counted last week are no cause for alarm.

Overall district enrollment is up by 1 percent over last year, yet that is only 46 more students than the head count in 2000. So enrollment actually has remained flat for nine years. Using it as an argument for a $370 million bond does not fly.

JOHN MERTES
Wichita

October, 2008 in East Wichita News
‘No’ to School Bond Issue

Who would not VOTE NO for a school bond when the money is misdirected? That’s what the $370,000,000 USD 259 bond issue is, coming up for a vote in November’s election.

The money does not address USD 259’s major shortcomings. New buildings or citadels of grandeur don’t educate children’s minds. $20 million for athletic dressings doesn’t put knowledge in children’s heads to pass tests. Of three sources for USD 259’s dropout rate, they are a disaster. A national survey has it at 40.4 percent; the superintendent states it at 25 percent; and the Wichitans for Effective Education (WEE) estimated it at 30 percent. Whatever it really is, it is totally unacceptable when private schools drop-out runs between 5 to 2 percent. For those who graduate, the cost per student in USD 259 is over $16,000 a year!

The school board and CARE claim the $370 million bond is for the children! But not one penny–zilch, nada, none–of the money is budgeted to help one student improve his mind. USD 259 is a dismal failure to about one-third of its students, and they shrug it off!

There is no accountability in USD 259. Anything over a 10 percent drop-out rate should not be acceptable for the money already being spent. We elect a school board to represent and protect the tax payers. No sooner were the votes counted than they jumped in Winston Brooks’ (the departed Superintendent) lap, and another multimillion dollar bond was proposed.

Over 65 percent of a billion dollars in less than 10 years they earmark to spend and don’t address a one-third student dropout rate. And that is for the children!? USD 259 needs a lots of accountability before the children’s learning will be taken into consideration.

VOTE NO on the $370,000,000 bond issue in November. A NO VOTE is the only sensible choice. The people need a school board to see to it that USD 259 gets its house organized to address the dropout rate and its priorities in order, first. VOTE NO to stop it.

Toby Elster

October 3, 2008
Silence on bond

How fortunate that school-bond proponents have the only daily newspaper in town to orchestrate their campaign for bond passage with ongoing front-page coverage. No paid advertising needed.

How fortunate that the school district is able to manipulate and use its students and athletes on weekends in neighborhood door-to-door campaigns.

How unfortunate that the many teachers and district personnel against this bond cannot speak out for fear of repercussion.

How fortunate that some real estate offices in town can require their agents to attend "informational meetings" presented by bond proponents.

How troubling the number of churches hosting "informational coffees" where only proponents are invited to speak.

How unfortunate and telling for bond proponents and USD 259 that not one leading business organization, civic group or group of business leaders has stepped up to endorse this $370 million bond.

ANGELA BURGER
Wichita

September 24, 2008
'No' to bond

Every time you vote "yes" for more taxes, the message is loud and clear to all governments: "We like more taxes, so please go spend as much as you can. Don't worry about all of the retired and low-income people who can't afford more and more." My income is the same as when I retired 15 years ago, but my taxes have more than doubled. There has to be a stopping point for all of the overspenders. Please help yourself and me by voting "no" on the school bond issue.

LEWIS HOOBLER
Wichita

September 23, 2008
Reform schools

Fundamental educational reform is needed across America as evidenced by low achievement scores, high dropout rates and America's low world ranking. Reform is often a tough sell. School district administrations and teacher unions often feel threatened by it. The need for reform just might be what the real opposition is to USD 259's proposed $370 million bond issue.

When the status quo of public schools fails, families deserve choices, be they vouchers, charter schools, home schooling or other opportunities. Bureaucratic red tape and teacher unions should not deny any child the opportunity for a first-class education.

Principals deserve more input into how their schools are run and how funds are allocated within their buildings, with the bottom line being performance.

And teachers need alternative certification processes so that those who want to teach are able to do so. Knowing the subject matter and measurable student results should supersede existing, bureaucratic and union-controlled criteria for certification. Teachers who succeed in making a difference in student performance should be rewarded monetarily.

JERI G. HINKLE
Wichita

September 15, 2008

Using pork to pass school bond vote?

In an 11th-hour attempt to garner support for the proposed 2008 school bond, $10 million was added for a possible aviation technology magnet high school. Although less than 3 percent of the total price tag for the bond, the additional dollars for a technical education school are little more than a desperate attempt at pork-barrel spending to purchase bond support from the aircraft industry.

If all this seems kind of familiar, it is. The school district pulled this same kind of bait-and-switch routine on the 2000 bond issue.

That $284 million bond issue plan included $2 million for the Wichita Area Technical College, which, among other things, had courses of study in aviation technology.

In 2004 the school district separated from WATC. Although the bond was passed in 2000, work on the facility had not started by 2004, and USD 259 stepped out of the realm of aviation technology training. The $2 million promised for technical training in 2000 disappeared into thin air.

Since that time, the Sedgwick County Technical Education and Training Authority has been created. Sedgwick County has committed $54 million of taxpayers' dollars toward the National Center for Aviation Training at Jabara Airport, with substantial support from aviation and electronics companies.

Why would the school board duplicate what is soon to be offered at Jabara after having abandoned this very idea in 2004?

It is this type of reasoning that forces me to question the credibility of the proposed $370 million school bond.

TOBY ELSTER
Wichita

September 13, 2008

District's last word

If columnist Mark McCormick were any kind of journalist, he would have done some investigative reporting into suggestions made by those opposing the Wichita school bond rather than settle for everything the school board spits out as gospel ("Opponents of school bond skip specifics," Sept. 10 Local & State).

Bond opponent Helen Cochran offered a plate full of alternatives that could save this district millions of dollars. In his column, McCormick quoted school board president Lynn Rogers as saying there is a cost to using existing facilities for athletics, as suggested by Cochran -- well, duh. That cost is a heck of a lot less than the proposed $61 million the district wants to spend on shiny new athletic facilities.

The arrogance of this school board, specifically Rogers, flies in the face of McCormick's disingenuous plea last month for a "civil" and "informative" debate. McCormick will always give USD 259 the last word, and in so doing, he fails to bring this community together and willfully divides it. And that is not in the best interests of our children.

ROBIE TAYLOR
Wichita

September 5, 2008
Conflict of interest on school bond?

George Fahnestock, the main business supporter of the latest USD 259 bond issue, is a great guy. Unfortunately, he lives outside the boundaries of USD 259. He owns Fahnestock Heating & Air (residential) and is a 25 percent owner of Central Air Conditioning (commercial). He certainly pays his commercial share of Wichita property taxes that support USD 259.

Central Air is on the USD 259 bid list, and if this $370 million bond passes, Fahnestock has a fair shot at making a lot of money. I don't have a problem with this -- it is the American way.

Now that the basic details are exposed, perhaps we can get on with the real issues at hand, such as: Is this bond really for the children, or is it for the economic benefit of architects and contractors? Or is it for an administration and district that are failing to address low test scores and think throwing more money at facilities will teach Johnny to read?

My late father, Lionel Alford, would have been more pleased if USD 259 had a plan to fix the problems of low performance and high dropout rates, instead of building unneeded structures and extravagant sports facilities.

L.D. ALFORD
Wichita

September 3, ,2008
Budget for schools

Eagle news columnist Mark McCormick (Aug. 31 Local & State) dismissed bond opponent Helen Cochran's suggestion to use available district money (currently $110 million in carried-over funds from the 2007-08 budget) or annual capital outlay funds (received each year) to build new schools as untimely and not cost-effective.

What McCormick fails to realize is that once $370 million (assuming the bond passes) is released into this community, construction costs will be maximized as contractors clamor for the windfall. It would be much more prudent to release money slowly and force the market to compete on a per-job basis.

McCormick continues to argue that if we don't do everything in one fell swoop but instead budget these schools over several years, construction costs will rise. Budgeted construction will use interest-free, available money. Bond money uses money that is financed over 20 years. I dare say the interest on that money will be much higher and far outweigh any rising construction costs.

ROD STEWART
Wichita

August 30, 2008
Civil spokesman?

Who anointed Eagle columnist Mark McCormick the social conscience of Wichita and official spokesman for USD 259?

McCormick has written several columns regarding the merits of the $370 million bond proposal. He continues to taunt, chastise and belittle any group that dares to oppose the wisdom of USD 259 in its push to spend more taxpayer dollars.

In his Aug. 24 column, he called for a "civil" and "informative" debate, yet he continued to stir the controversial pot. McCormick has failed to remain civil or informative.

Further, he asked both groups to reveal their supporters. By law this is required. I am sure both sides will comply. It is not McCormick's job to also serve as Kansas secretary of state. Surely he has enough to do looking up synonyms for "naysayer."

The public will weigh both sides of this argument. No additional editorial opinion is necessary. McCormick and the fourth estate need to take a break and let this community decide what is best for its children.

JIM MATTINGLY
Wichita

August 19, 2008
Budget ahead

USD 259 is proposing a $370 million bond issue to upgrade school facilities. It would make a lot more sense and save a great deal of money if the school board -- instead of ignoring maintenance and replacement and coming to the taxpayers every 15 or 20 years for a bond issue of several hundred million dollars -- would include sufficient funds in its annual budget to maintain and replace physical facilities.

The interest on a $370 million bond issue over 20 years will be in the vicinity of $250 million, for a total cost to the taxpayers of about $620 million. If the school system would simply budget $20 million annually for maintenance and replacement, it would save more than $220 million over 20 years and actually provide more money than the bond issue to spend on facilities.

Perhaps the members of the school board should be required to go back to high school and take a class on basic math and economics and a college class on responsible fiscal management.

SAM KNECHT
Wichita

August 17, 2008

Bond consists of wishes, not needs

An Eagle editorial and a column by Mark McCormick on Aug. 13 encouraged the Wichita school board to make more effort in selling the bond issue and counseled the school board to recognize the problems, such as a soft economy, increased living costs, higher taxes, frustrated parents and lack of leadership. The editorial pointed out that too many last-minute moves and surprise motions have made matters worse. How can a board that is indecisive "exude confidence," as McCormick advised?

The basic problem has been exposed: The original proposal was a wish list. Drafters of the proposal did not carefully review and prioritize USD 259's needs. Adding and subtracting things to that wish list in order to sway segments of the voting public reveals this shortcoming of the original proposal.

Nothing has been said about what USD 259 is doing to address the discipline issues that McCormick has raised. Nor has anything been said about what can be done to lower the dropout rate or raise student achievement. It's been argued that better athletic and art facilities might help. But that did not happen in Kansas City, Mo., which spent $2 billion over two decades.

How can the school board charge full speed ahead with an expanded proposal with so many unaddressed issues? Its oft-repeated claim that this is "for the kids" rings hollow.

August 15, 2008

There is no doubt we need more schools. There is, however, doubt that this school board is competent enough to handle the amount of money it is requesting. We still haven't gotten full disclosure about what happened to the last bond we gave the district.

The Wichita Eagle editorial board also makes me wonder what it is the newspaper gets from this new bond. After columnist Mark McCormick's berating of the naysayers (Aug. 3), and Richard Crowson's Aug. 12 editorial cartoon suggesting opponents don't like children, I wonder whether there is a partnership between The Eagle and the companies that will be paid most of the money from the bond.

The school board is like any other political group. It spends without caring how little gets accomplished. The taxpayers will dole out more to finish whatever is started. Maybe we're tired of that. The Eagle editorial board trying to shame us into giving in to free spending is newsworthy itself.

Come up with a plan on how the school board will use the money wisely -- not just make business owners rich off our taxes -- and voters will OK it. The reason I hope it will fail: The school board can't give us that reassurance.

DEVLIN STEPHENS
Wichita

August 11, 2008

Board listening?

Eagle columnist Mark McCormick should go into politics. He did a great job of attacking his opponents but failed to make a strong case about how the proposed $350 million school bond issue will benefit students ("Naysayers shouldn't drive school bond debate," Aug. 3 Local & State).

He argued that bond opponents offer "no viable alternatives," but opponents have made several overtures to this school board to sit down and discuss the issue further. Such overtures have not been answered. The Eagle has printed many suggestions by the community as alternatives, but perhaps McCormick does not read articles written by other people.

It is interesting to note that bond opponents have continually asked the board for cost-effective alternatives, but have been given none. This leads one to conclude that "viable" and "cost-effective" alternatives cannot be one and the same, and can be demanded of one group, but not the other.

JESSICA JOHNSON
Wichita

August 10, 2008

Scrutinize bond

The proposed $350 million school bond issue plus the $284 million bond approved in 2000 equals $634 million. With interest, that would be more than $1 billion in spending approved by this community over eight years. I doubt most of us can even comprehend how much money this actually is, and yet we are expected to go merrily along and approve such expenditures because it is "for the children."

I am happy to see The Eagle reporting and the community scrutinizing the latest proposal.

Some in academia are predicting that by 2020, schools will include virtual schools as well as many online classes so that children can progress at their own pace. These programs would offer options outside of traditional buildings and could alleviate the ongoing argument of overcrowding and smaller class sizes. If we approve this latest bond, what will it then cost us in the future to renovate all those empty buildings we so wisely decided to build?

As we anticipate the future, we should start thinking outside the box and consider alternatives to a proposal that might be obsolete before it is even paid for.

BILL WEEDIN
Wichita

August 8, 2008

Missing the point on school bond

Mark McCormick has written some thoughtful columns, but "Naysayers should not drive school bond debate" (Aug. 3 Local & State) was a disappointment.

The column was filled with dichotomies. Yes, there was the dichotomy of bond proponents and opponents. Then there were the false dichotomies: Proponents are visionary, opponents are myopic. Proponents are for education, opponents are against education. Proponents are advocates for the kids, opponents are not. Proponents are open and honest, opponents are duplicitous. Proponents have alternatives, opponents do not. Proponents are well-intentioned, opponents "mean the district -- and its students -- no good," etc.

McCormick's strident generalizations did nothing to bring honest and thoughtful people with differing opinions together. Although he is capable of a higher quality of journalism, this column was no more than a diatribe. The students, the parents and the citizens of the community deserve better.

GEORGE PEARSON
Wichita

McCormick thinks that by laying a guilt trip on those of us who oppose the school bond issue, he can shame us into voting for it. The faltering economy is an issue, whether he likes it or not. What about those taxpayers who already are financially strapped? What would McCormick have them sacrifice? A couple of meals a week? How about doing without electricity for a few days each month?

He complained that no one has offered a viable alternative. Well, try this: Keep intact all the projects proposed -- the building improvements, sports and fine arts facilities, even the proposed technical program changes submitted by the Citizens Alliance for Responsible Education. The only way a bond is going to pass is if you give people who support these various projects the assurance that they are going to get something positive from it.

In return, scrap the new buildings -- all of them. Few schools in USD 259 are at or near capacity. For those that are, much of the overcrowding can be remedied by redrawing existing school boundaries and reopening vacant buildings. Wichita taxpayers just might vote for this type of bond proposal if they saw it as a compromise -- a win-win for both sides.

Unfortunately, I have little faith that the school board will go for anything less than what has been placed on the table. So if it sets the election for Nov. 4, I will walk into the voting booth and vote "no" with a clear conscience -- just as soon as I've stopped at my favorite Starbucks.

KEN BREEDEN
Wichita

August 4, 2008

School soap opera

It is troubling to watch the unfolding soap opera at USD 259 over the bond issue. I would like to know what this Citizens Alliance for Responsible Education group is, and what qualifies it to make recommendations to an elected body that wants to spend $350 million of taxpayer money.

The Eagle has done a fairly good job of reporting bond specifics but falls short when it comes to connecting the dots between the various players.

What is the relationship between Schaefer Johnson Cox Frey Architecture and the CARE group? Is the architectural firm the "community input" that CARE continually refers to but cannot name? And how did CARE identify "technical education" as a critical need, when a year of bond planning and community input was unable to do so?

Is it true that all school board members have risen from the ranks of CARE or were financially backed by CARE in their bid for elective office?

Does the community realize that the board's ill-advised delay of the bond vote now adds $10 million in inflationary costs -- a cost the public will pay if this bond passes?

Has the need to pass this bond become an egocentric mission of the board, as opposed to something really for the children? I mention this only because the athletic facility upgrades argument -- to keep kids in school -- has been dropped with CARE's recommendation to cut those improvements by $27 million. I guess that argument wasn't worth fighting for.

Who's driving this school bus?

ANDREW LOVELACE
Wichita

August 1, 2008
School board's bad signals on athletics

Regarding "Bond drops some athletics" (July 29 Local & State): Although I have no doubt that there are a significant number of pressing needs in our public schools that should be addressed by the enactment of a new bond issue, the constantly changing position of Wichita school board members does not inspire the requisite confidence to support the current proposal.

First, we were told of the necessity of holding the vote in May to avoid increased construction costs, which already are up by $10 million, according to the newest figures. However, when a group of bond supporters realized that the proposal was likely to fail if voted on at that time, the board opted to postpone the vote to an as-yet-undetermined date.

Now, many months after the original bond issue was made public -- and again, acting on the advice of a few citizens -- the board appears to support a reworked proposal that shifts money from athletic facilities (an area that we had been told was vital to the welfare of our children) to a previously unmentioned area of need.

In the best of times, passage of this bond issue would have been difficult. But I believe this board's indecisiveness, ineffectuality and overreliance on the opinions of a few have made the bond's passage impossible. Thus the problems will continue to exist and the costs will continue to increase.

JACK E. NIBLACK
Wichita

Regarding the proposed elimination of several projects from the school bond issue: About five years ago, the Topeka school district built Hummer Sports Park, which includes central football and soccer stadiums and a districtwide swimming pool. If Wichita would get smart, it would spend a few extra dollars and build a districtwide pool. This pool would be big enough for the five high schools that need new pools (North, South, East, West, Southeast) to have swimming and diving practices simultaneously. This pool would save money by reducing maintenance costs and building costs, and the old pools could be filled in and put to a new use.

The pool could also make money by being open to the public and charging fees. Depending on location, local club teams could use the pool for west-side practices and meets. Rental fees make a substantial amount of money for facilities that otherwise sit empty. Other area high schools could rent the pool for their practices as well. One of the only downsides is busing athletes from the schools to the pool, but as it is now, all divers practice at Northwest High School, and East High buses to Wichita Swim Club.

IAN WOHLGEMUTH
Wichita

June 8, 2008

Act on bond

I attended the May 12 meeting of the Wichita school board. Representatives of two organized groups opposing the bond -- Helen Cochran with Citizens for Better Education and Bob Weeks with Wichitans for Effective Education -- were invited to express their concerns.

The speakers stood for about 35 minutes fielding questions like "What have you done for the school system lately?" and "Will there ever be a school bond issue that you would vote for?" My personal favorite was, "If we answered all of your questions, would you then be in favor of the bond?" Doesn't that depend upon the answers given?

When the board postponed the May 6 public vote, the reason given was that more time was needed to educate the public. It has been nine weeks since the postponement. When will this promised education begin?

So that this community may move forward, the board needs to announce its intent. Set a date. Educate the public. Consider postponing until a new superintendent is hired. Review to prioritize needs. Or explore alternatives with more cost-effective strategies. Do something.

As Cochran noted in her testimony, "further manipulation of the process is not appropriate."

DICK MATTHES
Wichita

May 31, 2008

Questions on school contract

As retired educators, we read the article "$1 million to get new teaching strategies" (May 26 Eagle) with concern.

While it is important to improve the educational opportunities offered Wichita students, entering into a one-year contract calling for the expenditure of $1.1 million to improve failing schools in the district is difficult to comprehend. This is especially true when USD 259 taxpayers learn that there was no bid process, and that the company involved doesn't even have to demonstrate measurable results.

At a time when the USD 259 school board is working on another bond issue, taxpayers of the district are being stretched to understand the thinking of board members.

TED and JAN EBERLE
Wichita

May 30, 2008
Wizards at work

The Wizard of Oz is alive and well: USD 259's preferred architectural firm, Schaefer Johnson Cox Frey, shares office space with the district's support group, Citizens Alliance for Responsible Education. As the "Saturday Night Live" church lady used to say, "Now, isn't that special?"

The article "Pro-bond group conducts survey" (May 22 Local & State) made this reader wonder: Just who exactly is pulling the levers behind the curtain and whose curtain is it? It must be the secret Great Oz, as CARE co-coordinators Sarah Olson and Randy Thon certainly knew very little about a survey their group claimed to be paying for. Both Thon and Olson said they didn't know who is conducting the survey, how much it cost, or the nature of the questions being asked. If the apple (CARE) doesn't fall too far from the tree (USD 259), then these lax accountability issues are understandable.

There is nothing wrong with conducting a survey. It is an extremely costly strategy ($30,000 to $55,000). The problem arises when the public realizes it is being misled.

I suggest the wizard is Schaefer Johnson Cox Frey, and one of the curtains belongs to USD 259. CARE is merely the lever.

HAROLD NEWBERRY
Wichita

May 25, 2008

New facilities didn't get results in KC

One aspect of education is learning from others. Starting in 1985, a federal district judge ordered that $2 billion be spent over 12 years to bring Kansas City, Mo., schools up to par with suburban district schools.

The Wichita school district and a front-page news article argued that a $350 million bond issue would help bring parity with surrounding school districts ("Bond seeks to level the playing field," May 18 Eagle).

It is a known fact that kids in sports usually do better and stay in school longer. However, The Eagle's article implied that new and improved facilities are what made kids participate in sports and therefore do better in school.

Much of the Kansas City money was spent on grandiose facility improvements -- such as an Olympic-sized swimming pool -- neglected school maintenance, 15 new schools, a school district zoo and to lower student-to-teacher ratios. It was argued that all of these improvements would bolster student achievement.

The Kansas City expenditures were a dismal failure in achieving the intended goals. Student achievement did not improve. Students continued to flock to the suburbs, where academic achievement and student-to-teacher ratios were considerably higher.

State-of-the-art facilities and amenities do not retain students, nor do they bring families to, or back to, a district that does not focus on academic achievement as its No. 1 priority.

HELEN COCHRAN
Citizens for Better Education

May 22, 2008

School thrills

What kind of young generation are we raising? I read where six of the seven largest Wichita high schools are going to have new swimming pools if the bond issue is approved by voters ("Bond seeks to level the playing field," May 18 Eagle).

A necessity, right? Well, yes, some argue -- if we don't have swimming pools, new tracks and tennis courts for the students, many of them would not continue to attend school. What else must we provide these privileged students so they will attend school? We have the highest-paid teachers in the state of Kansas. Are they so boring and dull that we have to have "things" at school so students will keep attending? Why are our graduation rates so low, and why do we have such a high dropout rate? Not enough entertainment at the schools?

When I went to school, we had basketball, football and band -- that was it. I liked school, as I enjoyed being around my friends and remember competing with one friend who always made A's. Is there any competition among students in our schools today?

All parents want the best for their children, and most taxpayers are willing to provide good schools and classrooms. But swimming pools?

M. ELAINE SKELTON
Wichita

May 20, 2008

Fixer-uppers

The Catholic Diocese of Wichita is buying a school that USD 259 had deemed too old and decrepit to use for Wichita students (April 28 Local & State). A man bought the old Alcott School on Murdock that USD 259 also shut down because it was in such bad shape (May 6 Business). This man is making it over into apartments. Isn't it amazing that people will be able to live in this building, but the Wichita school system could not fix it up enough to use for classes?

Many of us live in older homes. We fix maintenance problems when they occur. Using what one has, instead of throwing it out, is the financially and environmentally friendly thing to do. Why is that not true for the public school system?

Just how stupid does USD 259 think the people of Wichita are? Do we need to have a bond issue to raise funds for its wish list? I don't think so. I think we just need more thoughtful and frugal people on the school board, with some sense of fiscal accountability to the taxpayers.

BARBARA PROVINE
Wichita

May 10, 2008

School solution

Wichita is a generous community, but it is also a community that expects innovative thinking when it comes to addressing difficult issues. Overcrowding in some of our schools is one such issue. We need a cost-effective, creative solution, because overcrowding often changes from school to school and decade to decade as neighborhood population bases fluctuate.

Wouldn't it be far less expensive to redraw boundary lines to accommodate these changes? New schools should be built only when all other considerations have been exhausted. Blackbear Bosin Academy (seventh through ninth grades) is a perfect example of underutilizing existing facilities. It has a capacity for 200 students, and yet only about 70 students are enrolled.

The district as a whole is at less than 90 percent capacity in its schools. I challenge the administration to see how much money can be saved by thinking outside the box. In fact, bonuses should be put in place to reward those who tackle such a mind-set.

ROBERT EISEL
Wichita

May 6, 2008

BOB WEEKS: MAYBE DISTRICT SHOULD RETHINK
BOND QUESTION

Wichitans for Effective Education wish to remind the residents of USD 259 that on Feb. 11 the school board passed a resolution declaring that a special election was to be held today. That resolution asked the citizens of this community to approve a $350 million school bond proposal. On April 7, on the advice of an allied citizens group, the board decided the election should be delayed until some yet-to-be-known date.

The board originally argued that it was imperative to vote as soon as possible instead of waiting for the August primary or November general elections, even though the special election would cost about $75,000. As evidence, chief operations officer (now interim superintendent) Martin Libhart delivered to the board on Jan. 28 a presentation titled "Time Is Money" that explained that if the bond issue election were delayed until November, the cost of building just one high school would increase by $360,000 -- far more than the cost of the special election.

The district also argued that if the election were delayed until August or later, the opening of the new high school would be delayed by one full school year.

Nevertheless, on April 7, the board abandoned these arguments.

Much effort went into preparation for the May special election. News outlets devoted extensive coverage. Three citizen groups formed to campaign for and against the bond issue. Expenses were incurred. Opposition groups have had to deal with a shifting landscape of facts emerging from USD 259. We relied on figures supplied by USD 259 regarding the costs of building safe rooms, only to be told we didn't understand the true situation. We relied on figures published by USD 259 in its most recent comprehensive annual financial report on school capacity and enrollment, only to be told those numbers were out of date.

Sometimes getting any information from USD 259 is difficult. We asked for a count of classrooms and portables for the past two school years, and were told that information is available at a cost of $860, with most of that paying for 40 hours of staff time. Since school overcrowding is one of the reasons given by USD 259 as the need for this bond issue, we wonder why these figures are not readily available.

The changing schedule of the bond issue election and the unreliable facts provided by USD 259 make it difficult to thoughtfully consider the merits of any proposal at this time. With the possibility of looming economic recession and the lack of a permanent superintendent in place to lead the Wichita schools, perhaps the best idea yet is to pull the bond issue question altogether. This would give the district time to research and locate all significant data. Then both opposing and supporting groups could base their decisions on accurate and timely information.

May 2, 2008

Wasteful spending

As a junior in Wichita East High School's International Baccalaureate Program, I must first of all commend the school district for approving not only the East High program, but also the new Gordon Parks Academy. However, as we approach the vote for the bond issue, I believe we must first of all look over past and current spending.

I understand that technology is important for students' education, but I believe there is much too much money being allocated toward technology. In my classrooms, over the weekend, my teachers' relatively new Dell computers were replaced. I know that the old computers could not have been so inefficient that the teachers would need an entirely new system, keyboard and flat-screen monitor included.

Money being spent much too lavishly should be redirected toward at least some of the bond issue projects. I encourage voters to re-examine past spending before looking to add more of their hard-earned dollars to the district.

KATHERINE THOMAS
Wichita

A clueless board

Someone please tell me how we don't have within our USD 259 staff one person or a combination of a few people with the talent to do the job of "director of equity and accountability" ("School board OKs hiring consultant," April 29 Local & State). Just to hire a consultant to help fill the position, the board approved first-year costs of $85,000, plus expenses; next year it expects to spend $300,000 on a two-person department and consultant fees. The board members showed here how they value our dollars. What stewards.

Then the board sold Carter Elementary to its own competitor (private educational system) for a song, $300,000. Wait -- now let's all go vote "yes" to build new schools for $350 million, so in 10 years we can sell these for $300,000 each. Maybe the board should attend some business, finance and accounting classes along with "stewardship" instruction at a local privately funded classroom.

It's funny how when spending other people's money (ours), the board can appear to be so careless and foolish. Board members have suggested that those of us who don't see it their way don't truly understand what the issues are and what they are dealing with. I guess not.

MARC KAPLAN
Wichita

Helen Cochran: Bond Vote Delay Shows Board's Lack of Integrity
by Helen Cochran

Download a copy of the article click here.
The Wichita school board's vote Monday night to postpone the school bond ballot from May 6 until perhaps Nov. 4 is a slap in the face of the democratic process we rely upon for self-governance. Even so, Citizens for Better Education will continue to oppose this bond issue based upon the merits of its proposal and not on the lack of integrity exhibited by USD 259 leadership.

At a Jan. 28 school board meeting, opponents questioned the merits of an off-cycle ballot with traditional low voter turnout. The board and superintendent Winston Brooks insisted that to prolong the question would add hundreds of thousands of dollars to projects because of inflation and rising construction costs, as well as delay the opening of new schools. Opponents acquiesced to the May vote when the board argument was made to save money.

Now that it is known that the school board has been unable to garner support for the largest school bond in state history, bond proponents were allowed Monday night to ask for and get a postponement of the vote in order to "educate the public." At this so-called "public meeting," opponents were denied the opportunity to speak. According to the clerk of the board, it was a "closed agenda." Closed to whom? Supporters were allowed to speak; opponents were not.

Why were bond supporters allowed to secure a postponement when opponents were denied this same request six weeks ago? Would bond opponents be able to request and be granted a "special closed agenda" meeting with the school board? What was the board so afraid of that it was willing to place a muzzle on every citizen who dares to disagree with its predisposed decision?

Bond opponents honored USD 259's request to hold a May 6 election and have respectfully operated under the rules the board established. It is an insult to our democratic process and reeks of cronyism for the board to simply change the rules when it realized there was questionable support for this poorly thought out and poorly planned bond proposal. No wonder political cynicism abounds. Every citizen of this district should be appalled by the board's actions and be alarmed with the precedent it sets.

Citizens for Better Education will continue to oppose the proposed bond for three reasons:

• A weakened economy, which is the wrong time to ask Wichitans to bear an additional financial burden;

• USD 259's lack of prioritizing critical school needs versus a $350 million wish list; and

• The inability or unwillingness of the school board and USD 259 to explore cost-effective alternatives.

Helen Cochran is a spokeswoman for Citizens for Better Education.

Making safe rooms the No. 1 argument for bond passage is incredible and borders on emotional blackmail because it is "for the children." Of course we want our kids to be safe, but I don't think that has a hill of beans to do with why people are opposing the 2008 bond proposal.

Alfred "Buzz" Hatcher
Wichita

Fixer-uppers
The Catholic Diocese of Wichita is buying a school that USD 259 had deemed too old and decrepit to use for Wichita students (April 28 Local & State). A man bought the old Alcott School on Murdock that USD 259 also shut down because it was in such bad shape (May 6 Business). This man is making it over into apartments. Isn't it amazing that people will be able to live in this building, but the Wichita school system could not fix it up enough to use for classes?

Many of us live in older homes. We fix maintenance problems when they occur. Using what one has, instead of throwing it out, is the financially and environmentally friendly thing to do. Why is that not true for the public school system?

Just how stupid does USD 259 think the people of Wichita are? Do we need to have a bond issue to raise funds for its wish list? I don't think so. I think we just need more thoughtful and frugal people on the school board, with some sense of fiscal accountability to the taxpayers.