Press "Enter" to skip to content

Madison Pares School Plan to $6.3M Bond, $8.2M Existing Funds, Still Wasting on Gym

Wow: I guess we were right to send the Madison Central School Board back to the drawing board. Instead of letting the board and a sycophantic media strong-arm us into a rushed vote on an extravagant luxury gym with heated rhetoric of imminent doom and accusations of hating education, Madison voters last winter told the school board, "$16.9 million? No, we think you can do better than that."

The school board has trimmed some edges from the blueprint, bringing the price of the new gym and high school renovation down to $14.5 million. Perhaps more remarkably, the school has realized that it has $8.2 million in funding available in existing capital outlay. On November 8, Madison voters will get to decide whether they want to fund the remaining $6.3 million by issuing additional bonds.

Of course, if the school board and high school administration weren't so fixated on building an unnecessary gym, they wouldn't have to issue any bonds at all, and they could let bids right now. Once again, sports stand in the way of real progress.

36 Comments

  1. Jim 2011.09.20

    I am so tired of your anti-gym rants, tirades, and quips. You don't want a gym. We get it.
    In my mind the proposed gym seating is too grand, but in my mind the library might also be too big, given the nature of todays youth getting their information more & more by electronic means.

  2. Michael Black 2011.09.20

    Cory seems to be saying if we had no school-sponsored sports, we would have no need to waste money on an unnecessary luxury gym.

    There might be a few students and even more parents that disagree with his view toward school-sponsored sports.

  3. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.09.20

    No, Michael. None of my above text calls for an end to school-sponsored sports. We could conduct all sorts of sports without a new gym... just as we do now.

    Jim, even in the electronic age, we can make a better education-based case for a "third space" within the school where students can gather, study, and read books, tablets, Kindles, whatever, than we can for a big sports temple with lots of bleachers. The library supports academic objectives. Bleachers and bigger gym floors do not. Your tiredness of the argument does not change its truth.

  4. Michael Black 2011.09.20

    Begin blatant sarcasm.

    Just think of the money we could save Cory if we did not need any gym at all! Kids text all the time when they sit next to each other. All they need is their phones and not a special room to gather in. More money saved!

    If it was only about what was truly absolutely necessary, we'd change out the lights, fix the HVAC, change out windows, and redo the bathrooms and locker rooms. We'd add a ramp to the library and have chorus and band practice in the existing auditorium. We'd cut every elective and teach just the required courses. We'd get rid of all buses. If a student wanted more we'd tell them to go to Chester, Rutland or Ramona.

    End blatant sarcasm.

  5. Jim 2011.09.20

    Begin snarky comments

    That's right, I forgot. Cory is the only one entitled to have an opinion, and if you do not agree with his opinion, you have a tired argument, you are wrong in every sense of the word, and Cory is right in every sense of the word. Your fascination with doing away with athletics and having large areas for students to sit in harmony while doing their homeowrk, thesis, French lessons, or any other myriad of scholastic endeavors is what is getting tired.
    Your constant petty school yard pecking of the proposed plan is driving me to accept any plan presented just to get you to (gulp) silence yourself and move on to the next anti-Noem, anti-Republican, anti-establishment conquest you have sighted in to your perfectly oval lenses.
    There really are good things that come from your humble blog, but then again there is a lot of hogwash also.

    End snarky comments

  6. Douglas Wiken 2011.09.20

    Forget interschool athletics and use the space for exercise machines and require all students to spend some time on them every day.

    The problem with sports supporters' snerk and sarcasm is that it makes more sense than their usual nonsense in favor of wasteful useless programs.

  7. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.09.20

    Nowhere did I say no one else is entitled to an opinion, Jim. And my glasses are perfect circles. Not ovals. Circles.

  8. Michael Black 2011.09.20

    If the taxpayers want to support a gym as part of the remodel then they should get out and vote for it.

  9. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.09.20

    And if taxpayers want to support spening money on teacher pay and academic essentials, they should get out and vote accordingly as well, without having to take any crap from the principal's husband about how opponents of the new gym just hate education.

  10. Michael Black 2011.09.20

    The vote will be on a remodel not on teacher pay. You might be able to call certain improvements academic essentials. Voting against the remodel and gym will put off improvements for one more year.

  11. Jim 2011.09.20

    Sorry for the ovals comment. That was yet another rant of yours. Your glasses are circles. I stand corrected.
    An updated school and gym are needed.

  12. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.09.20

    Voting against the new gym could also drive the board back to come up with an even better plan that focuses every penny on academic essentials, just as defeating the previous plan drove the school board to realize it really could save the taxpayers millions of dollars. An updated school is needed. An updated gym is wanted.

    (Try staying on topic, Jim. I don't drag your personal chracteristics or eyewear choices or my feelings about you into the discussion, because none of that changes the facts.)

  13. Michael Black 2011.09.20

    I don't think that you'll get rid of the gym with any future plan. Even if you do you will see significant cuts in area areas.

  14. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.09.20

    So we're back to having academic necessity held hostage by stubborn policy-makers who refuse to fulfill their primary mission without spending huge amounts on a secondary mission. And people call me stubborn?

  15. RGoeman 2011.09.20

    I'm thankful that the District went to work to find creative ways to keep our property taxes lower. They are using a combination of Capital Outlay funds and bonding so that our taxes only go up about $60 a year on a $100,000 home. It's really going to help farmers and business owners save money...And yes, after 46 years, we might finally get a gym that garners respect as a useful facility.

  16. Michael Black 2011.09.20

    Cory, you can be assured that you are not called stubborn...maybe other colorful adjectives...

  17. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.09.20

    Rod, we could also get a lot of respect by cranking out more National Merit Scholars and MIT-bound engineers.

  18. Michael Black 2011.09.20

    Wait too long and do too little and parents will vote with their feet. Students will continue to bleed from the district.

  19. Heather Lee 2011.09.21

    My daughter seen the plans in the paper tonight. During the disscusion Her comment was "Why do we need a bigger gym? What we have is big enough."

  20. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.09.21

    Michael, our gym space is not the reason students leave the district.

    And Heather, to answer you daughter's question, examine Rod's comment above. We "need" a bigger gym for the same reason some people "need" a bigger SUV: they think size matters.

  21. Charlie Hoffman 2011.09.21

    I certainly agree with you on this one Cory. Teachers teach children; books help make it stick, labs open up peepholes, but million dollar gymnasiums/sports centers are all built for the parents.

    Now if we could just get those local school boards to open up the coffers a tad more for the true deliverers of our childrens knowledge...........

  22. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.09.21

    ...absolutely, Charlie. Let's convert that $6.3 million bond issue into an opt-out to fund raises for teachers!

  23. Charlie Hoffman 2011.09.21

    Cory how about putting all the lottery money into an irrevocable trust fund and take 10% to 20% of the interest every year and sending it equally divided to all of our K-12 teachers every year in the form of a bonus. Does anyone know how many teachers we would have applying for jobs here in SD? The lottery money would then be spent where it was once approved for. Had we done this in the beginning we would now have over one BILLION dollars in our gambling trust fund and at current rates it would be making $70 million a year in interest and growing by about $65 million a year. 10% of that would be a very large increase in teacher pay sent out every year and it would be there forever.

  24. Bill Fleming 2011.09.21

    Charlie, that seems like a capital idea, sir. (Or should I say "capitol"?) Either way, can you get it done?

  25. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.09.21

    Indeed, that's exactly what the lottery was intended for. Make it so! And keep that money focused on general fund expenditures, especially salaries. Let's recruit some teachers (or just help me pay my rent and stay in the game)!

  26. Charlie Hoffman 2011.09.21

    Most of the intellectuals I have ever known here in South Dakota have been saying this plan should have been put in place right out of the block with the gambling revenues. Getting it done now will mean displacing fear mainly. Nothing is out of the question though.

  27. Bill Fleming 2011.09.21

    How can we help, Charlie?

  28. Charlie Hoffman 2011.09.21

    Honestly what we need are a few accountants putting out a 10 to 15 year budget of expected revenue from all gambling sources and find a percentage we can move into the irrevocable trust every year without jeapardizing our current budget plan. Once we have that a bill can be written to accomodate the numbers.

  29. Michael Black 2011.09.21

    There is no shortage of teachers applying for jobs. By increasing one revenue source does not mean that the state will give any more money to schools. I know that state employees have not received any raises in three years. They are the ones who will have highest priority for any new money.

  30. RGoeman 2011.09.21

    Charlie, your idea for placing Lottery revenue into a trust is great, but the cattle gate's been open for years. I'm a Republican and I'm sad to say that the SD Lottery was created under Republican leadership, promises were made to voters under Republican leadership and not one promise about funding education with all those dollars has happened. We haven't had a Democrat in the Governor's Office in many years, so the idea of making our party accountable now is doubtful, unless Dennis Daugaard's principles lead him in that direction, which would be nice. Previous governors simply spent the money via the general fund. Maybe it's time we keep one promise we made to voters years ago.

  31. caheidelberger Post author | 2011.09.22

    I may address the video lottery funding question in a separate post. Back to the original question: if the high school improvements are so important for safety, and if the capital outlay fund has enough money to completely do those renovations, why not proceed with those vital fixes right now, without a vote, and float the bond issue for the new gym separately? Wouldn't we get the best of both worlds then: a chance to solve real problems immediately and for voters to decide on whether the non-essentials are worth the investment on the side?

  32. Michael Black 2011.09.22

    Cory, what do you call "vital fixes"?

    It doesn't take millions to change lighting or fix a couple of bathrooms.

    What are the things that you would do WITHOUT eliminating the current gym?

  33. Casey M 2011.09.22

    Hell.. if its $60 bucks per $100,000... i'll go for it. So i dont go to Teezers or Stadium for one weekend in a whole year. I can do without! Like Rod said.. i like the fact they used their heads and found money and cuts. Its a plan that i'll actually favor this time around and it'll make everyone happy pretty much.

  34. Casey M 2011.09.22

    gym or not. The general public wanted the school board to sit down and do it smarter. And they did. It will undoubtly pass I believe. No reason to fight against it.

  35. Michael Black 2011.09.22

    Do Cory's words "unnecessary luxury gym" give you the impression that he will give up the fight? He has over a month left to campaign against it.

Comments are closed.