Thanks, Steve, for being in favor - it is time that this city move forward.

The tax payer got the short end of the stick again. The people did not have asay in this its wrong we have aldermen with their own agenda running this city time to clean house this coming election WI PARK DOSE NOT CONTROL THIS CITY THE TAXPAYER DO VOTE THEM OUT

Don't let Verhalen's rhetoric fool you. He is on record supporting building a second high school with a potential price tag of $65 million dollars, which is one of the reasons why he is against the land swap. He also proposed and voted in favor of a $4600.00 bonus for the School Superintendent in 2011. So much for saving the taxpayers money.

Mark was on the Facilities Committee that recomended building a second high school, its a matter of public record. If you talk to Mark-which I have-he'll tell you he thinks that the second HS option is preferable to a freshman campus, no secret there. As far as the bonus goes, its the only bonus paid out to a school district employee in 2011, the voters will determine whether it's an appropriate use of taxpayer dollars or not. As far as the personal attacks go, I'll take the high road.

I was on the Five Year Facilities Committee also. Many options were laid out before us and we sat thru most of the last meetings looking at boring charts and designs from Upstein. Upstein was paid by the district. Another big waste of money as the Committee recommendations were not given any consideration by the board, (other than Verhalen’s Nay Vote) on the land swap and 9th grade isolation annex. Conclusion: Verhalen stuck to his guns and the voice of the committee.
WHAT DON”T YOU GET ABOUT DR. SARA LARSON’S $4,600 BONUS? The board gave her a bonus rather than a pay raise and saved the district money. If the board had given her a 3% raise that you support the granting of to the cops, they would have given her with her salary of over a hundred grand a year about $3,600 in additional income and pension contributions (360.) and carry over of increased salary costs to the following salary review which in the end costs more than the one time pay out bonus. Not to mention again the thousands of dollars Dr. Larson saved the district in bringing all non-union administrative staff on board with ACT 10.
About the only thing your right about is the voters will choose weather they want Verhalen and VOICE and CHOICE AND FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY or Scaffidi who will give them neither and continue down spendthrift avenue as evidenced with his denial of referendum and limitations on public speaking as acting mayor and president of the common council.

Vocal Local 1. You seem biased. And maybe we should call you village coward since you are so strong behind your keyboard calling names.. Grow up..

A lot of cities put referendums on their ballots when they are proposing High $ projects, I remember when Saint Francis was doing a high school study some years back, they put a referendum on the ballot concerning it, and the choices were:
A. Build a new high school.
B. Build an addition and renovate the current high high school.
C. Leave the school as is, and maintain it.

Needless to say the majority were for leaving the school as is, as the student population isn't anywhere near the schools capacity.

As far as a second high school goes, the school district covers Oak Creek and Franklin, when having to deal with the student population of 2 cities it might be wiser to build a second high school to absorb additional students when the need arises, between the cities, like closer to 27th street (city border of Oak Creek and Franklin) would be a better option, putting it so close to the existing high school makes no sense. Or the cities should dissolve the pact and each city have their own school district.

Also, our city's frivolous spending needs to be curtailed, and Wis Park/We Energies needs to be booted out of city hall, they don't own the city of Oak Creek, unless a former mayor/common council gave it to them without the citizens approval, which wouldn't surprise me much seeing that when most people get into office they change and abandon the citizens after telling them they have the citizens back during the campaign just to get the votes.

Something sure is irregular. Council will meet and reportedly vote Monday the night before election. Agenda is not posted and was not mailed to the candidates on the ballot. Anyone know what is going on?

I was on the Facilities Planning Committee also, and I am extremely disappointed that the district is not going to consider a second high school. The population projection data that was presented seemed that this was the best choice for students and the community. I only wish others had felt that way instead. OC-F has the lowest spending per pupil in the metro area and I don't necessarily think that is a point of pride if you look at test scores and other outcomes.

Just to clarify, it was not the facility planning committees job to make any recommendations only discuss the pros and cons of the various options. Some wanted a second high school and some did not. Interestingly enough Rosemary and Mark did not start showing up until at least 4 or 5 months into the meetings and then Mark talked over everyone with ideas that we had already discussed and dismissed.

Paul, Juniper is correct -- we were instructed that we were to consider the data and present the best options with pros/cons. Was this just a waster of volunteers' time in order to pay lip service to the idea that the community was consulted in this matter? Perhaps. In the end, it was always going to be the decision of the school board.