As I See It
Still more questions than answers on La Crosse school referendum
Have all your questions been answered? The La Crosse School District held its 11th and final community information session about the upcoming school referendum last night. The district did a good job involving homeowners, parents and educators to share their concerns and ask their questions. But it seems there are still more questions than answers. We were told initially that approving $194 in spending would ultimately make sense for taxpayers, because of the district’s declining enrollment and aging buildings. Those issues are real and problematic, but does that mean this is the best way to solve the problem? Is building a new combined high school at this particular location, for this much money, the best use of our tax dollars? If not, what is Plan B? That still seems vague. Apparently what they didn’t tell us is that even if the referendum loses, Logan High won’t be saved and those students would likely be moved to Central. It is quite possible that La Crosse no longer needs two public high schools. And La Crosse voters have a long history of supporting school referendums. It seems residents don’t like much of this plan but still have no real guarantee of what happens if they say no.
Nick
October 27, 2022 at 8:23 am
This school issue of declining enrollment , aging buildings and insufficient funding is being played out in other states as well.
The school population will continue to decline, the buildings will continue to age and maintenance costs will continue to increase.
The school board would have done a great service if they had an engineering firm give a report on the buildings, the cost to maintain for let’s say ten years.
An alternative is to combine middle and high school but that puts 6th graders in with 12th graders and no one nationally thinks that is a goood idea.
The biggest problem and no way to get around it is LaCrosse has very little viable open space.
The question is if you want the status quo are you willing to pay for it?
It is the only way to keep the status quo.
I have a lot to say about how cities and towns want state money and states want federal money so local taxes can be kept low and people get re-elected on up the food chain