It is interesting to see how different school districts handle referendums in terms of gathering public input and distributing information.
We all saw last April how the Monroe school districts referendum passed overwhelmingly after a series of public meetings before and after board decisions were made. And New Glarus two referendums failed after a committee that made referendum decisions met intentionally out of the public view so much so that it likely violated state open meetings laws in the process.
For the record, a referendum later last fall passed in New Glarus after a much more public process.
To me, the formula seems obvious.
1. Make it painfully obvious to the public that a referendum is ahead. Share the grim financial picture and rail on the state Legislature for creating a system that virtually forces districts to have referendums to keep pace.
2. Establish the financial gap that must be bridged by a referendum. Solicit public input, preferably through a series of painstakingly public meetings, to determine what specifically is at stake in a referendum vote what will be cut if it fails, and what will the money pay for if it succeeds.
3. Get the referendum question established as early as possible.
4. Be very public about whats at stake. Have detailed financial breakdowns and explanations. Discuss them at public meetings and in informational pieces that reach the districts taxpayers. Make adjustments if public reaction dictates. Meet with as many groups as possible. Answer reporters questions.
From my perspective, districts that follow these steps have a lot more work to do, but they also stand a much better chance of getting the tax dollars they seek.
So how well are local school districts that are working on referendums involving the public?
Monticello, which plans to have an April 1 referendum, has had a lot of meetings to discuss the options. Thats good. There seems to be decent public participation in these meetings. Thats great.
Pecatonica also will have a referendum on April 1. Early last month, interim Administrator David Westhoff told the Times, There was probably less (public input) than we feel the referendum will ultimately require, Westhoff said. Those of us in public positions have not received the public input that we should have. Not great. Since then, however, there seems to be an effort under way to get the public involved. Better.
In Darlington, which has a question on the ballot in two weeks (Feb. 19), its been quiet, quite frankly. Thats rarely a good thing. And weve had readers contacting us who are concerned that little is being said and little information is being shared. Definitely not good, if that, indeed, is the case.
If you live in one of these school districts, whats your impression of how the referendum is being handled? If you live in a district thats had a referendum in past year or two (and doesnt that include everybody?!), how did it go?
Im interested to know.
We all saw last April how the Monroe school districts referendum passed overwhelmingly after a series of public meetings before and after board decisions were made. And New Glarus two referendums failed after a committee that made referendum decisions met intentionally out of the public view so much so that it likely violated state open meetings laws in the process.
For the record, a referendum later last fall passed in New Glarus after a much more public process.
To me, the formula seems obvious.
1. Make it painfully obvious to the public that a referendum is ahead. Share the grim financial picture and rail on the state Legislature for creating a system that virtually forces districts to have referendums to keep pace.
2. Establish the financial gap that must be bridged by a referendum. Solicit public input, preferably through a series of painstakingly public meetings, to determine what specifically is at stake in a referendum vote what will be cut if it fails, and what will the money pay for if it succeeds.
3. Get the referendum question established as early as possible.
4. Be very public about whats at stake. Have detailed financial breakdowns and explanations. Discuss them at public meetings and in informational pieces that reach the districts taxpayers. Make adjustments if public reaction dictates. Meet with as many groups as possible. Answer reporters questions.
From my perspective, districts that follow these steps have a lot more work to do, but they also stand a much better chance of getting the tax dollars they seek.
So how well are local school districts that are working on referendums involving the public?
Monticello, which plans to have an April 1 referendum, has had a lot of meetings to discuss the options. Thats good. There seems to be decent public participation in these meetings. Thats great.
Pecatonica also will have a referendum on April 1. Early last month, interim Administrator David Westhoff told the Times, There was probably less (public input) than we feel the referendum will ultimately require, Westhoff said. Those of us in public positions have not received the public input that we should have. Not great. Since then, however, there seems to be an effort under way to get the public involved. Better.
In Darlington, which has a question on the ballot in two weeks (Feb. 19), its been quiet, quite frankly. Thats rarely a good thing. And weve had readers contacting us who are concerned that little is being said and little information is being shared. Definitely not good, if that, indeed, is the case.
If you live in one of these school districts, whats your impression of how the referendum is being handled? If you live in a district thats had a referendum in past year or two (and doesnt that include everybody?!), how did it go?
Im interested to know.
