It appeared to me that only Jamie Johnson seemed to address the complexity of the superintendent's raise. He was the only candidate who acknowledged that the superintendent took a $8,900 cut in her fringe benefits package.

The actual change in total compensation was $4,200, or 2%. Most employers (private or public) would make the decision based on the total cost and not just on the salary value.

Oh but Christopher, if you look at all the facts about salary and benefits it is not as jaw dropping and does not fit the narrative that Kunz pushes that everything related to the administration and board is so bad. She speaks of integrity and all the research she does but then states that she would cut administration jobs because "she has heard that we might be top heavy." Heard from who Jeanette? What research tells her that we are top heavy. And then she panders to the teachers as if she will cut admin salary and give it to the teachers? Boy there better be a lot of 360 degree teacher audits to use her own rationale. She confuses aggressive sensationalist baseless attacks as a sign of qualification to being a good board member. And yet more talk of researching ways to add onto the high school. What a joke.

Yeah...so let's see. She gave up some benefits and that justifies a huge raise. Unheard of at this time. My husband should go get her job. When the university took a percentage of his salary he just lost it. Bad PR they said if he kept it. Kunz does her research and comes in with facts to back her statement. Jamie Johnson was caught in a bold face lie. Stating that he did not agree with the dog track. ahhhhh. He was at 3 public meetings saying he was in favor. He is another bobblehead. kunz is the real deal. kunz for school board.

Do your research TNT, Johnson said he was against it at first, so no bald face lie.
Kunz said she heard we might be top heavy regarding administration. Where is the fact in that statement? Where is the research? She carps about non-issues like open enrollment, and is just a Gerhke clone, She is great at displaying outrage and second guessing but has not offered any sign that she can or will solve any issues, real or made up to get elected.

first she doesn't display outrage. second if you would talk to most parents and teachers out there they would agree with Kunz. The research is in the budget as we'll, as obvious to many of us with the amount of adminstration on staff. administration that receives raises while 2 of our school janitors were cut and the locks in the girls bathrooms in our middle school are broken. the tennis courts need resurfacing before one of our children break their leg. top heavy is being polite. and johnson never had doubts on the dog track. he stated his view in favor of it in the paper as a letter as well as at 3 different public meetings

More negativity TNT. That is all you, Jeanette Kunz and Sandy Gerhke have to offer. More whining about the tennis courts? Sounds like April Simmons is back with another ax to grind. Bathroom locks? Seriously? I suppose that is also the superintendents fault. Kunz talks of wasted dollars spent on research showing that the current high school is not worth adding on to yet wants to study that exact option yet again. More wasted time and money as our schools are over capacity yet she claims the school board has done nothing. Johnson, along with over fifty percent of the voters decided that the dog track was an attractive site for a high school. But here we are, arguing about band aid solutions and bathroom door locks. And yes, after Johnson researched the issue, he got involved and led a group trying to get our space needs taken care of for now and the future. It is what community minded people do. That is a hell of a lot more than two anonymous bloggers like TNT and painereliever are willing to do.

Hudson would be fortunate to have Ms. Kunz on the school board. I have had the pleasure of working with her and can attest to her passion and positive demeanor. She looks for creative solutions to problems and often finds a way to cut spending without negative impacts. In one project alone, she saved $200,000 because of her knowledge, relationship building, and dedication to performance.

Ms. Kunz gives credibility to those on the front end, and seeks out their input for a complete picture an organization. If she confirms something has gone awry, she immediately looks for a process to rectify the issue. In my opinion she is a wonderful team player and selfless leader.

Saved who $200,000? Pertaining to what? Let's look at the public record. The majority of Kunz's public statements, letters to the editor etc are based on some type of complaint or problem she has with someone who is in some way serving our community. She has gotten really whipped up about a non-issue like open enrollment, alleged board conflict of interest and a few other school issues and has attempted to use them to sensationalize public outrage in an attempt to gain votes. On the flip side, mr. Johnson and Mr. Hanson have volunteered in many community causes and have risen to leadership roles in local civic and charitable and religious organizations that try to better our city and community. Jeanette Kunz has proven herself to be an aggressive speaker and letter writer but the actions taken by Hanson and Johnson say quite a bit more.

Michael, I'd like to commend you for both your initiative and execution in providing this valuable public service. I thought you asked excellent questions that highlighted some of the important distinctions the various candidates have on the various issues. Thank you to all the candidates for your willingness to put yourself and your opinions out there. I hope our communiuty is mature enough to disagree with an opinion without attacking the person behind those opinions. Thank you also to those who made this possible through your financial contributions. This was a great example of civility in civil discourse. I hope we can keep it going here and elsewhere and build a strong community consensus that benefits all of our children.

Why did the Superintendent ask, at the very least, one person, that being Bruce Hanson, to run for the School Board? He seemed to dance around Jim Schrock's question that pertained to this very issue. When pressed, he finally admitted that he had no problem with it, but if that were the case, why not let people know upfront? He seemed uneasy with this being brought up. If he has no problem with it why the big secret? My feeling is Bruce is just another one she wants on the board so she can get her way.
While I don't know any of the candidates, I'm sure they're all really good people, but I want people on the school board who will question things and not be a puppet to the Superintendent. That's why I'll be voting for Jeanette and Jim.

Ms. Kunz has volunteered for numerous organizations over the years as well and helped those in difficult situations. Being more humble than Hanson or Johnson, she doesn’t stand in front of the crowd and pat herself on the back for each and every instance. It seems perfectly fitting that Hanson and Johnson were recruited by the superintendent, for she is the expert at giving herself accolades. When Schrock posed the question, Hanson even admitted he has no issue with the superintendent recruiting school board members. When Kunz questioned Johnson, he could not think of one instance where he challenged the board or superintendent in recent years. If you want two school board members that will do no more than the two departing ones, you will likely select Hanson and Johnson.
Kunz and Schrock are refreshing in their truth seeking perspective and honesty. I would not expect either of them to roll over and play dead when voting on difficult issues.

On strength of performance, demeanor and knowledge of the issues I thought Bruce Hanson was the hands down winner. Johnson and Kunz presented equally well and there is a clear choice between the two based on agreement (Johnson) or disagreement (Kunz) with regards to the present administration and the current direction it is headed. Schrock clearly speaks with his own voice and displays an admirable independence. Kudos again to you all.

With the strong emphasis from all four candidates on the importance of 1) technology integration, 2) project based learning and, 3) collaboration; it is a shame that we lost our most experienced and innovative elementary Libray Media Specialist to Woodbury last year. To be completey honest this is as mucn the fault of the union as it is the adminstration. Unions should be about setting floors and not ceilings on members' wages. If teachers in our district can no longer advance their salary through the grid, it is innappropriate to negotiate their starting salary from that same grid. We need better ways of determing salary and raises in the recruitment and retention of top teaching talent. This, in my opinion, is the most important issue confronting our district in the long run. I post this against the wishes of that same experienced and innovative elementary Libray Media Specialist now serving in Woodbury ;) I love you honey, but this is too important to be left unsaid.

Hudsoner, as far as the administration being top heavy, this is all simple math. I challenge you to show instances where our district has positions that are out of line with other like sized districts. And yes I am sure you could bring up one or two examples but then you must look at the responsibilities etc. some districts may not have a position we have but contract it out at even greater cost. And of course the teachers would feel admin is top heavy. I am sure the factory workers at 3M feel thier admin is top heavy too.

Hudsoner, do you think Jeanette Kunz would give a raise demanded by a certain "master teacher" you are always carping about? I can see that chip on your shoulder all the way from Trader Joe's.

Well Scott, would you vote rather for a candidate that is handpicked by the superintendent?

To have some more persons on the board that rubber stamp all her decisions? Even if GOP candidates are elected (and I don't know the party affiliations of any of the candidates), they still will be the minority on the board, but be strong enough that descending voices will be heard! Isn't that what we understand us democratic decision making?

I have never paid too much attention to school board elections until the SCM mess reared its ugly head. The way that decision making process unfolded caused me to sit up and take notice for a change. I have had a chance to talk to each one of the candidates on an individual basis about this election and feel that they would all serve us well in a more normal climate. Under the current circumstances, however, I feel that the Board needs to be populated with more independent thinkers who are willing to challenge the status quo and foster more transparent and inclusive board proceedings. My thanks go out to the Patch for providing a forum that will allow me to make a more informed decision on April 2.

One of the quotes that I admire Teddy Roosevelt said, Criticism is necessary and useful. It's often indispensable, but can never take the place of action. And when you're looking for a candidate to get on our school board you want someone who is going to act. And you can judge them by their past actions and where they've invested their time, treasures and talents........ We have a four-way test in Rotary to everything we think, say or do: 1) Is it the truth? 2) Is it fair to all concerned? 3) Will it build good-will and better friendships? 4) Will it be beneficial to all concerned?
It's not us versus them. -- Jamie Johnson, Candidate Forum #1

Both Jamie and Bruce have no problem pronouncing how great they are at being leaders. Jamie particularly prides himself with being the Alpha-dog of Rotary Alpha-dogs which, in my opinion, is nothing more than a self-assigned group believing they are the premium leaders of the Hudson community. Volunteer and charity work is one thing, but they certainly don't speak for me when it comes to policy and government concerns.
Taking what Jamie said, we can judge him by his past actions - he lobbied hard for passage of the dog track rezoning. He was in complete agreement with the school board taking land away from the city tax base which would have hurt city operations.
So, it looks as though Jamie failed on all 4 points of his Rotary test. It really is us versus them unless the alpha-dog says differently.

Paul, you are one of the people who are resposible for this perceived "climate." The SCM "mess" as you call it was actually a viable way of addressing space needs for the future. It may not have been to your liking but it was an effort no less that was presented and supported by many in our community. It was Dean Knudson himself who got the ball rolling. So you do a disservice to the goal of addressing our space needs by continuing to harp about it the way you do unless you have an answer to our basic need that will gain 100% support. If you had paid attention over the years you would know that some of the same people crying about the need for independent voices looking for cheaper ways to address space needs will not support anything anyway. The same people appealing to teachers to vote for Jeanette Kunz now will be wanting to cut thier wages and benefits tomorrow. They will turn on Sandy and Jeanette the second they dare vote yes for anything. This is not new.

Paul, if you think 70% consensus is possible on anything in this town I think you are overly optimistic. We barely passed the Rivercrest referendum by a couple percentage points and that was a no-brainer. Now the same people who said we didn't need that school claim the board didn't build it big enough. You can't win. If you have a balanced board, by that I take it you mean 3 or 4 Sandy's, how will a split vote inspire confidence In the community? Our space need is now Paul. Lets do it right or you will hosting a CAC to infinity.

Let’s see, Elvis was the king of rock, big Mike Jackson the king of pop and Huey Long was the King Fish. Budweiser the king of beers, Gable the screen’s king and Mr. . Carson the late night king. Who did you say was the king of kings or the leader of leaders? It’s all so confusing….

Beefeaters; isn’t that a gin? That makes sense I think most of the Board is boozed up half the time anyway…

Part 2.
The high school that I attended was built in 1940, which makes it nearly 75 years old now. About 10 years ago that school board looked at as a candidate for closing, but the community didn't want that to happen. So, in a positive way, architects were hired and the building was re-vamped and expanded to the tune of $23 million and now that building will serve the community for another 50 years.

However this success story did not take place in an aura of "hate and negativity". It was a positive and cooperative spirit that accomplished it. That district has five other high schools so this was not the case of saving "the" school.

The Hudson area has everything to offer for future growth and progress except a positive attitude. Perhaps something needs to be filtered out of the water supply?

It is just totally disgusting to listen to.

Like the educated wealthy liberal you have the answers you just need to communicate them to the ignorant masses. We are just hicks stumbling through the dark; we will need the beacon of your words to guide us on our way. What a crock ! There’s nothing wrong with a heated debate that inflames the passion of ones convictions. Without resolve you should sit along the sidelines and let others decide for you. Write or wrong , good or bad people should express what they feel, anyway they feel fit. Without passion your dead….

Hudson Star Observer, August 22, 2012, Johnson's direct quote on the wisdom of the Hudson School District purchasing the dog track. You be the judge.

Hudson Star Observer
August 22, 2012

Hudson attorney Jamie Johnson urged the city to “do what is best for students” and support the rezoning of St. Croix Meadows, the site he believes is best for a new secondary school.

“Hudson has a reputation for being a great place for education. And we know that a good school system is the number one predictor of a successful business climate.” Johnson added that Hudson has one of the lowest taxpayer cost per student in the state and that he does not support “putting kids in trailers” to address classroom space shortages. He applauded the actions of the school board and asked residents of the school district “not to lose sight of what is right for this district for the long haul.”

More on Johnson's position on dog track purchase and rezoning.

PLAN COMMISSION
April 12, 2012

Jamie Johnson, resident of the town of Hudson and a share holder in the law firm of Lommen Abdo in Hudson commented that the responsibility of the city plan commission is to review if the requested amendment is consistent with the comprehensive plan and the other factor such as tax base is probably a Common Council decision. The location of a school facility is the issue; there is agreement that more space is necessary, but the question is where and what is best for the community. Johnson opined that the change in zoning is consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan. Johnson commented that the comprehensive plan must be flexible and updated on a regular basis noting that market forces and political approaches change over time. The plan should be reevaluated to be sure the policies and classifications of mapping remain consistent with the overall goals and values of the plan, Johnson stated. A city cannot always predict the future, but it can review past actions. He commented that the School District of Hudson has demonstrated fiscal frugality in the past. In the previous city comprehensive plan, adopted in 1993, amendments were not rare and that there were 11 changes to that plan. Johnson added that the city also had a plan adopted in 1970. (JOHNSON'S WORDS CONTINUED IN NEXT POST)

(CONTINUED FROM ABOVE, PLAN COMMISSION MINUTES, JOHNSON'S ATTEMPT TO CONVINCE PLAN COMMISSION TO REZONE THE TRACK)

Johnson commented that 6 of the 11 changes to the 1993 plan occurred in a two year period following the construction of the middle school in 2006. This emphasized that communities do place value on quality schools. The city has grown, nearly double in area, in the past 17 years; and the school district has grown significantly in population as well. The land uses adjacent to the St. Croix Meadows site are primarily residential and institutional with the elementary school and Camp St. Croix, all of which are compatible with the use of the property as a school.

Johnson's words regarding his position on the school district purchasing the dog track, from the March 12 Patch forum: "I was not -- I thought that seemed like a lot of money and I was not initially in favor of it." At some point he bought into the plan as is evident from the Plan Commission and HSO article. Not only did Johnson advocate for rezoning at the Plan Commission, he spoke in favor of the purchase at a school board meeting. He has been a long time supporter of the need for a new high school and sports complex. Mr. Johnson is now adopting a more moderate position, but his past words and deeds tell the true story.

Great research! Further solidifies why I will be voting for Jamie Johnson!! He has been active in trying to address our space needs instead of more delay tactics by the same people that are long on complaints but short on solutions. Please note that doing nothing is not a solution.

Mr. Johnson's quote above was in response to Ms. Kunz's question about when he has challenged the school district or administration. Mr. Johnson clarified and repeated Ms.Kunz's question and stated, "When have I challenged the school district?" And then he went on to cite his position on the dog track purchase as an example of when he asked tough questions of the board and the administration. Since Mr. Johnson was strongly in favor of the purchase and rezoning, as proven by his own words, his position regarding the dog track is not a very good example of asking tough questions of the board and administration. Please watch the above video of the forum. You will learn a lot about all four candidates.

Question - are Paine Relief and Paine Reliever husband and wife and why are your user names so similar? You have been confussing the snot out of me. I'm like what the heck I thought Paine Relief was for Johnson - is this dude schizo or what?

And here is exactly where Johnson (and Hanson) fall short with their thinking. The dog track purchase was a terribly negotiated deal for not only the city, but all taxpayers in the Hudson school district. It was simply too much money offered for an area that the city had designated for other uses. Why didn't the school board abide by the city's comp plan? Why make the city change it's course when they had already set aside land for public purposes? The county land being two acres short of the school district's desires showed a complete lack of respect for the comp plan. Johnson should have recognized that, but chose otherwise. His siding with the 55% showed a lack of understanding with regards to zoning laws and who has ultimate authority over land use inside the city's corporate limits. This excuse saying that the city had changed it's comp plan multiple times over a course of time leaves out the fact that during those changes the core principles of the plan were not altered. What was being asked here was a huge change.

Here is the video of Mr. Johnson speaking to the school board advocating for the purchase and rezoning of the dog track.

http://hudson-wi.patch.com/articles/video-hudsonites-address-school-board-about-dog-track-purchase#video-11024129

Vested interest, I don't believe Mr. Hanson was a proponent of the dog track. Not that it matters, it was a possible solution to fix our long-term space needs. Those that try to use it as a noose around potential schoolboard candidates necks can't seem to understand that it was a solution and it could have worked. That is why almost 60% of the voters agreed to by the doctor property with the expectation that it would be rezoned for a future school.

Scott, the school board tried to have the zoning changed prior to the referendum to purchase the property. The council stated that they did not want to show support or non support and said they would wait for the results of the referendum. Only after it passed and the district again applied to change the zoning did the council discuss and vote down the zoning. The council is every bit as culpable as the school board for how things turned out. This is all old news. More delays are on the way as Hudsons finest continue to play games.

Vested, you can try to cover for the city council all you want. Dean Knudson contacted the district about the track owners new willingness to sell after years of saying no. The district moved to get the purchase on the ballot. The city council had twice stated that city water and sewer could not be run to the UU property, So the district pursued the dog track with the goal of building space to solve our needs and erase an abandoned black eye on the city as well. It just may have been a great solution. Then when pressed, to muddy the waters, the council came out of nowhere with a promise of running a water line that even Mr. Darnold did not support. The city ignored the will of yhe voters due to the loss of 25 grand a year in tax revenue from the track. It became political and there you have it. By the way, i believe we have already spent more than the tax income on a lawyer dealing with local tobacco shops. The dog track is dead, let's move on. It does not change the fact that we are continuing to have a need for space. An argument can be made that the city was put in a tight spot, but they are every bit as responsible.

Scott, things are not easy in this town. If you talk to the city or the school board you will get different perspectives with different slants. I am willing to see that both sides made some mistakes. I am not willing to give the city a pass that they were victims and have no share of the blame as council members and some committee members claim. It is all politics and this will continue.

The minutes of both organizations are public record. The three options would appear to be 1) The school board tried to do an end run around the land use authority of the city 2) The city used the zoning regulations as a poltical tool to overturn the will of the voters or 3) We are being a run by a bunch on nincompoops that know neither how govern a city nor run a schoold district. I need to see the minutes for myself. It really is not water under the bridge, because someone is responsible for this mess and I don't want to vote for whoever is responsible in either the school district or the city. What a debacle...

When two individuals spew so much information with such passion and insight one should almost know the sources. Would our two orators reveal their identities please?

With regards to the question that was raised earlier of whether Hudson is going to continue to grow, it is not a question for a magic 8 ball (as one candidate suggested). Rather comes down to simple land economics based on three variables: 1) Where are the jobs 2) Where is the most affordable housing 3) What is the shortest and most convenient route between the two. Hudson has a distinct advantage over Sommerset and New Richmond in it's proximity to the jobs in the greater metro area and how to get to them. Just ask yourself would you rather drive I-94 into the cities or Hwy 36 during rush hour? For these two reasons, Hudson is going to continue to grow, but will likely attract higher wage earners that are willling to pay the higher land prices of the area for it's easier and shorter access to the the Twin Cities job market. Because of traffic flow and lot size these more affulent buyers, will look to build primarily in the township west of exit 4 and south of I-94 (along the Hwy 35 corridor towards River Falls). This is likely the rationale for why the school district initially purchased the UU property, and why they would be unwilling to give it up at this time. This is the future the Hudson area and its school district need to plan and build its infrastructure around.

Paul, the softball field swap is news to me, but how many acres are we talking about? I continue to believe that adding more buildings anywhere near the corner of vine and Carmichael is a mistake. Even with road improvements, there is too much congestion. Most proponents of a stem school see it as a cheaper way to make it through a population bubble. The stem concept is not cheap and most stem concepts are already part of our curricullum. My fear is that another dedicated small building will handcuff us in the future. Define foreseeable. We need to build for 20+ years into the future, not five. If the growth is going to be east of exit 4 and north of 94. Why not look at cheap land by nor-lake? all the bus traffic from the increased numbers from the stillwater bridge area would then not have to go through the city of Hudson. I am not advocating building a HS for 2500 kids and a tatal sports complex, but let's build smart to allow future flexibility. As far as splitting the district, I fail to see how that would be cost effective.

Their secret personas could be kept safe, Christopher. It's not my concern if they want to shield themselves out here.

I would not mind to participate in some brain storming about future plans for a school expansion.

The schools are overcrowded now, and more space is needed urgently, but the space should be planned carefully, and sport fields and whatever are not of importance with this planning. it is not the responsibility of the education system to create first class athletes, the schools should concentrate on academics.

Because of this, i don't care whether there will be football or whatever fields near a new school, as long as the learning environment is first class!

One thing we must get over is labeling anyone thinking we need to plan for future expansion, including space for potential future sports fields as being more concerned with sports than education. There are potential financial and scheduling advantages. What is the cost to bus all these kids back and forth from schools to fields? If there was a football field/ bleachers/track on high school property it could be used more efficiently and share parking. We could then sell the newton field property along Frear street next to EP Rock for residential development which would not only pay for the new field but add property back on to the city tax rolls. I bet if you contacted law enforcement they would rather have game night traffic and cars in a more controllable area. Area residents might be in favor as well.

Some very good arguments Pain Reliever! However, I am also interested in expanding the current high school. The hallway situation can be solved easy and cheap. I have some ideas for that. However, you are correct, one should not make any decision without any cost/benefit analysis.
This is, of course not the right platform for this. We can give some thought impulses only. whether they are heard is another question.

There was supposed to be a citizen planing group, but that idea was canceled, and I don't know who is now milling the planing ideas. For me, the current school board is the wrong group of people to do this. The failed dog track episode showed this clearly. It might be that a group with a little more expertise and technical understanding in these subjects would be better do do the initial planing!

Hudsoner, while I consider myself an open minded person, I am not open minded to banging my head against a wall repeatedly just to be able to say that I tried. Once is enough. I have listened to expert reports on the ability to expand the current school from the days of the task force. You will dismiss it but it is neither easy, cost effective or non-distractive to students to add a level to the high school. It wasn't then, it isn't now. The building had its time as a high school and served us well it will make a wonderfull middle school for some combination of grades in the future. You are not an architect and you do a disservice to the discussion by throwing out "cheap and easy." Also, the firms chosen to study our schools did have technical expertise in that area.
If you claim, that that firm was handpicked to tell us what the district wanted to hear, why don't you pay for your own analysis from a reputable firm specializing in school remodel / construction and by the way, it can't be Kunz, Schrock and partners:-)

Pain Reliever, did anybody looking at the current high school ever think outside the box? ho says it needs to b e on top of it/ There is a large area behind the school that is absolutely unused (now that Safeway took the school vans over, it is empty land. There is a football field behind the school that is hardly used, and some other land, why not use this for expansion? There is a gymnasium that could be reconstructed into a two story building holding almost 10 classrooms, a new gymnasium could be build somewhere else on the land (probably taking a few tennis courts away that seem to be there mainly for the general public). Out of the box thinking is required.

There may be other possibilities (like the land next to the govt. center). If the roads would be redesigned in a clever way (how about a traffic circle, they seem to pop out of nowhere nowadays), traffic would not be a problem. Anybody who thinks we have a lot of traffic in Hudson should live for a while in a real city.
Again, a little out of the box thinking can go a long way!

Hudsoner, please understand that what you think of as a "large area that is absolutely unused" may actually be required water retention, run off or absorption space. That is why the district rents St Pats parking space instead of just paving over the grass. Taking away a few tennis courts seems like no big deal to you yet in fact we need every court we now have or we can't host a tennis meet for conference play. Sorry, one traffic roundabout will not solve traffic issues. You go live in a "real city". I prefer Hudson. In fact the more you speak of "outside the box" ideas for expanding the high school the more you expose yourself as not understanding the basic needs and functional limitations we have. Right now we have 1600 kids in two buildings joined together with hallways never intended to accomodate 1600 kids. Insufficient cafeteria space and bathroom located on 43 acres with inadequate parking. Many kids cut accross the parking lot and use thier cars as lockers, which increases chances of access to drugs or weapons. This is a safety concern. Also, how will an addition to the high school address overcrowding at the middle school? I hear a lot of people saying they don't want a huge high school in Hudson, yet we already have the largest capacity middle school and it is over capacity. Any log term solution needs to take middle and high school issues into consideration.

Paine - you too, are making assumptions here. "may actually be required" - based on what? What regulation is there saying the limit has been reached here with water retention or absorption space? (Please don't have us reference some school policy - that won't fly.)

I won't pretend to know anything about the building requirements for 21st century learning, WIAA requiremnets to host varsity athletic events, or environmental runoff requirements. There are experts that can help with all of the important detail stuff. What I do know a little bit about is group dynamics, process, and building community consensus. It seems to me, as others have said, this task is simply too large for the school board to handle by itself. What I believe we need is a task force commissioned by the school district to come up with three options (good, better, best with three different price points) to present to the public in a run-off refendum, each having the pre-approval of the school board and of the necessary zoning and/or planning committees. The task force would be made up of a mix of 2-3 school board members of varying political ilks, a city commissioner (preferably from the planning committee), a county commisioner (again preferably on the county planning commission), and a healthy mix of citizens from all across the district (preferably people who are recognized leaders among various groups of people you will serve as spokepersons back to their spheres of influence OBJECTIVELY presenting the pros and cons of each of the three options once chosen. The public will then be responsible for selecting which option it feels is in the best interest of our community, and the decision will be binding....

Vested, the green space was discussed at length during the task force when all the properties were looked at. It is why building up instead of out was the only option, and that was limited due to the existing buildings foundational structure and floor plan. I can't quote the regulation or compare standards and practices for I am not an engineer, but I can retain enough information to understand what the experts have said and that if Hudsoner really wants a "first class learning environment" it just might not be attainable at the current high school site. Again, what would increasing the size of the current high school do to help the fact that Hudson has the largest middle school in the state, and it is over capacity?

Hudsoner, if you merge the middle school and Prairie elementary into one middle school, you would then have a mega middle school, holding around 1800+ students? At what cost? Plus add the cost of a replacement elementary school. That still does not address any of the high school issues, and there are issues. Unless the HS was 10/11/12. But if you did that the 400+ freshman at the remodeled 6/7/8/9 middle school would already be over capacity. This is a lot of gymnastics and ignores the obvious. Build a new up to date HS with features needed for students of the future for many generations to come that is 3 year with flexibility to expand to 4 year down the road if necessary. Convert the current HS to 8/9 and the current middle school to a 6/7. Or if you want less transitions, convert the current HS and current middle school to 6/7/8/9 to get two smaller middle schools. Oh,don't forget to sell the district office building and move the offices back into whatever school building that makes the most sense. If the new HS along with all the student traffic was out by Norlake or away from vine/Carmichael area, think how much less congested vine and Carmichael would be. Let us also remember that the county land has not been offered for sale and no price has been given, even when asked. Does it make sense to buy prime$ real estate to put an elementary school on? On the 2nd busiest corner in the city?

Could we please think twice about using these jabs out here? Calling someone arrogant or a hypocrite just adds fuel to the fire and turns people away from the fruitful discussion you guys are having.

OK Paine Reliever. That is fine, too! As I said earlier, a school near Norlake would make a lot of sense, because the close proximity of the bus garage would reduce the bus traffic by a lot.
But how about the land at UU? Din't the city say they would now consider to run services out to it? And there might be some possibility to share some of the fields of dream for sports purposes. The district owns this land already, and as you said, selling the land at EP Rock could bring quite some nice funds into the coffers of the district.

As I said earlier, out of the box thinking is required!

Again I don't know diddly about this sort of stuff and would always defer to people that have been properly trained. But to reduce transitions between buildings we could have all our the elementary schools go through 6th grade, and look to build another elementray school where the new growth is going to occur. Middle school would be 7-8, and we could look to do some sort of small magnate high school thing loaded with AP classes for brianiacs at a separate location or simply move these types of classes to a nearby location off campus. I believe the reason given for not having the middle school take over the elementray school is that it was not built to accomodate the house structure utilized by the ms. I like the idea of educational choices and options (no not vouchers) that doesn't assume a one size fits all approach is best for every student. On this principle we could also look a doing a small Montesory style school for the lower grades as a choice. This approach might make HSD very, very attractive to potential incoming families when compared to other districts.

Scott that sounds great. One could even look into the Minnesota type of charter schools for high school kids (Minnesota charter schools are public schools). In Woodburry they have a math charter school, and in other areas of the cities they have language or art charter schools, etc.. Some different charter schools share a building. I love this approach, give almost every child the possibility to learn the way the child learns best.

This si the kind of out of the box thinking I like!

Or what about a new high school that has a house type concept stem school within the school so dining /bussing /facility costs etc are shared to cut expenses but still has the separation. Maybe I am old fashioned but I like giving kids educational options while still encouraging social contact with the variety of kids that make up our community. I talked to some teachers when Sandy Gerhke first brought up the stem concept. They said we have many stem style curriculum paths and warned that the concept varies greatly. My main beef with a dedicated stem school is that to my knowledge, districts don't create them to alleviate space issues or control costs. There is a definite cost. I dont believe the numbers Sandy has pulled off the internet. But that is exactly what our community wants us to do, solve space needs and control costs. Interesting concepts and yes we need to be aware of trends in education and what is working in other communities. Also remember we are not free to totally reinvent the wheel. We have state and federal requirements that combined with our space issues may have more to determine what we do than our blog brainstorming.

Paine, the stem cell schools would be nothing else than several charter type schools under one roof. There are some schools in the cities in which different charter schools share a single roof. Stem cell schools would share not only a roof but also the admin, and would thus safe some cost. I like this very much. I am sure that we have teachers, former teachers, University of Wisconsin teachers (school of education), architects and engineers (and a few accountants) who can sit together and come out with the latest and greatest for a reasonable cost!

Wow, has the campaign for a seat on the Hudson School Board gotten vile and nasty. There is a slanderous email being circulated that was sent by a New Richmond attorney whose kids are open enrolled in the Hudson School District. It blasts Gherke and Kunz and Yacub too. It claims that these three people are members of some kind of conspiracy group that is plotting to destroy Hudson schools and “was instrumental in pushing the city council to vote against rezoning the dog track.” I had to read it twice to make sure that’s what it said because only one of the three had any say in rezoning the track, and that was her job. The other two had no power over the City Council.
The writer claims to be a relative of one of the three, but that’s questionable. I don’t know too many “relatives” who would sink as low as publicly making libelous statements about another “relative .” Glad I don’t have any relatives that hate me enough to do something this repulsive. It’s possible the email-writer-supposed-relative may be worried because Kunz won the primary and is likely going to be seated on the board. Why would that matter to the writer? Well, Kunz and Gherke have been vocally opposed to the open enrollment policy at HSD. If Kunz gets elected there is a good possibility the open enrollment policy will be studied and potentially revised. That may affect the malicious New Richmond email writer. She does not want her kids removed from Hudson schools. (more)

(continued)
The writer also objects to Kunz’s and Gherke’s opposition to building a new high school. Of course the writer wants Hudson to build a new high school. She must believe that Hudson building a new 60-90 million dollar high school will solve Hudson’s space problem, therefore making space for her kids to remain in Hudson schools. It appears she wants us to foot the bill for a new school so she doesn’t have to move her kiddos. Ain’t that special! We pay, her kids stay.

The writer sent the email out to people who “are active in the community including the school. I am trying to spread the word. I would appreciate you passing this information along.” That’s a direct quote from the New Richmond writer’s email. Well, guess which group got the email forwarded to them almost immediately? The Vote Yes supporters. Yes, that’s right, the Vote Yes supporters, and now they are spreading the email all about town. Here’s what the forwarded email said, and I quote: “I am forwarding the following email to you because you were identified as a fellow “Vote Yes” supporter. This email “was written by the sister-in-law of one of the candidates with a request that it be passed on to others.”

(continued)
So here we are, two weeks before this important election, and we have a desperate New Richmond attorney, who has her kids open enrolled in HSD, who CANNOT vote in this school board election, who doesn’t want her kids removed from HSD, starts a libelous smear campaign by writing a vicious, deceitful, dishonest email, sends it out, requests that it be forwarded to others, slanders a sitting school board member, slanders a sitting city council member and slanders a school board candidate with outright lies, misrepresentations and fabrications, all because she wants Hudson to build a new high school to make room for her kids.

It’s a sad situation when a public service position and election draws this much poison, venom and hatred. If you have received the email in question, take it for what it is, a fabricated pile of dung, a fairy tale, and an act of absolute desperation by a non-resident Mommy, attempting to smear three people for the self-centered purpose of keeping her kids in HSD. REMEMBER, SHE CANNOT VOTE IN THE UPCOMING ELECTION. She is not a resident of HSD. She should take her snake oil back to New Richmond and stay there.

I received the email as it was forwarded on to me. I was rather appalled that someone would go to such great lengths against their own family. That being said I find it humorous that this attorney would write such a letter and actually want it to go public. We arr a small town and lives are effected by such slander. That being said I would have to agree with Truthometer.

@george, the bigger question should be why would this person look to get her concerns out if they didn't have merit? And do we know it is slander just because you say it is? Maybe these concerns should be considered. Once again, why have you not posted the email if you have it instead of making judgements about something you are not posting. Kind of a weak position. And yes, Hudson is a small town, small enough to know that Mrs kunz volunteer claims at North Hudson elem school are exagerated. Just ask the parents that do volunteer.

I know nothing of the email. But two inaccuracies do need to be corrected. R Stime is right about open enrollment, if we have as many or more children enrolled outside the district. Think of it as players +/- rating in hockey. R Stime is wrong about the funding question (or wrong in part). Yes, we get the state per pupil payment, but school buildings are generally payed for by the property taxes of those that own property in the district. That said I would never condone any sort of email attack, where the accussed has no opportunity to correct or confront misinformation or false accusations. Make your arguments nobly in the full light of day with a letter to the editor under your own name, where both accussed and accusser are subject to equal public scrutiny. As a whole, we don't do conflict very well as a community. Here are some basic principles that are very useful to help maintain civility in our civil discourse: 1) Make sure you have your facts straights - we are entitled to our own opnions and ideas but not our own facts. 2) Don't pretend to know the motives of another - I hardly know why I do the things I do let alone the actions or opinions of another. 3) Ideas and opinions are fair game, but don't attack the people behind those ideas or opinions. 4) Show humility and deference to others - even those with whom you disagree - a person's true character is shown in how they treat those with whom they disagree.

@Scott, in regards to open enrollment, jeanette Kunz has in many letters to the editor and countless times in public made the connection that our district is irresponsible for not shutting down open enrollment because it is causing our capacity issues. This is not a new approach. Some in the community even charge that the district is using open enrollment to fill our schools to create the need for new buildings. This has been proven false. In fact the district usually approves as many in as they approve those leaving to neighboring districts. Therefore our communities cost of providing educational space for incoming students is nothing above the cost per pupil check that we receive. State enrollment guidelines dictate what is acceptable or not without costly litigation. We can't just approve all those leaving and decline all those wanting in. It is a non-issue that Jeanette Kunz is promoting as a divisive issue.

Stime - I think you missed where I said you were correct about the open enrollement issue. As far as new facilities go, they will be paid, in part if not in whole, from our property taxes. Are you disputing this second point, because we are in agreement on the first?

Let me clarify how and where educational funding is handled concerning open enrollment. The state sets the amount of dollars that follows an open enrollment student going to a district. Levy dollars, however, stay in the home district of the student. So if the cost of educating a student is $10,000 and the state only allows roughly $6,400 to follow, the rest is picked up by the district taking in the student. This is but one reason why district's are allowed to reject taking in open enrollment students. Levy dollars for buildings is a separate bucket of money and is why referendums are held to approve. Those dollars are outside of state set levy limits and only limited by statute which is 10% of the assessed value of the district.
If a district is able to send more students out than bring in, it's a good thing for property taxes since it then reduces the amount needing to be budgeted for, thus reducing the levy.

I do not have the exact information to argue against it so I will assume your data is correct vested interest but lets be clear, we have a history of breaking even or allowing less in than we let out. Therefore the policy is being used responsibly. The state stipulates that it can't be a one way street. And even if we could legally allow all request to leave and deny all requests to enter, you are talking less than 30 kids. It is a non-issue and is certainly not a resposible way to plan for the future.

Not quite correct - the state says open enrollment requests can be denied due to over crowding at the incoming district. Once a request has been denied at the local level, the requester can challenge the decision which is then decided by an outside group. In Hudson's case, the administration is claiming that both the middle school and high school are at or over capacity. One option that could be used to address the over-crowding issue is to redraw district boundaries by having students in Troy township assigned to River Falls and those on the extreme north end assigned to Somerset or New Richmond. RF and NR both have plenty of room to take students. Why this isn't being investigated is beyond me. When a district is at capacity, outside people don't have any over-riding power to force a district to build or expand. However, since the state is funding over half the expense of education, the state should be the one pushing districts to change their boundary lines when a district is at capacity and there is plenty of room in a neighboring district.

Maybe the capacity that is available at neighboring school districts is planned to have capacity now since they just built new high schools and addressed their space needs for the future. why would they want to expand their boundaries and fill their schools with our students? That is not good planning is it? You treat Hudson like it is mahtomedi school district. They have the advantage of being totally landlocked and fully developed. There is still plenty of residential development space within our district lines. We have to plan for that. Public schools cannot just turn away students when their capacity is full like Hill- Murray.

Vested - we have to work within the sytem we have not the one we wish we had. Stime is right in principle that the open enrollment issue is a non-issue, and that it is disingenuious for any candidate to try to politicize it to garner votes. But thank you for clarifying the dollars involved for us. Ceratinly it should be a district's goal to strike a open enrollment +/- ratio at or near zero to be fair to the tax payers of the district. $3600 a kid adds up fast.