A little over a month ago, I sent this Letter to the Editor in for publishing with the Daily News:
As we discuss the future of the vacated UW campus, some confusion seems to have emerged about the county’s focus. The county is not in the business of creating competition for the public schools. At the same time, we are also not in the business of preventing competition for the public schools.
We are in the business of managing the UW Campus building and grounds. For several decades, we have managed the maintenance and utility costs for this campus while UWWC occupied it.We are also in the business of addressing the mental health needs of our community. This is a mission I view as a major priority. The social capital hub Josh is proposing could significantly improve the delivery of mental health services effort. To make this work, we need an anchor tenant that pays a significant rent, and our annual costs to maintain the campus are around $750,000 per year.
Our County Executive has assembled a task force, which is charged with looking in detail at all of the available options. I anticipate that they will be thorough in their work and closely examine all of the options. I know there are a lot of options and details for them to review, so it will likely take them some time to complete their work. Once they have completed their work, they will make a recommendation, which will then come to the County Board for review. We can accept or reject their recommendation as we determine appropriate.
During this time, I ask for the public’s patience and understanding. I also ask for their input and welcome dialogue about the options being considered. I can be reached by e-mail at Christopher.bossert@washcowisco.gov or by phone at (262) 404-5158.
Thank You
Christopher Bossert
County Board Supervisor, District 4
Over the last month, I have heard from numerous constituents regarding this issue, and their comments all fall into 4 groups.
- One group of constituents believes that we are best served by tearing the building down and allowing a redeveloper to build housing or a mixed-use complex on the property.
- Another group believes very strongly in Josh's idea to make the building a "social capital hub." Our County Executive envisions this as allowing for improved delivery of mental health support services by putting a lot of the county's non-profit organizations in the same facility. The belief is that this will facilitate more collaboration and cooperation. This idea would also keep the campus' theater available to the various cultural and theater groups within the community.
- Another group believes that we should primarily focus on plans that protect the Public Schools from competition, by not allowing private or charter schools to have access to using any portion of the facility.
- A final group believes that we should actively recruit a private or charter school, especially one that will offer a tuition-free option, in order to support parental choice in education.
From my perspective, the County is not in the role of either shielding the public schools from competition or promoting competition with the public schools. So the County should really approach this decision without regard to how it impacts the public schools and let the chips fall where they may.
With that in mind, between the two remaining options, I would tend to support the approach of transforming the building into a social capital hub. I have always been a strong advocate for supporting the mental health needs of our community. If we have the opportunity to improve the deliver of mental health support services, we should do it. Josh's social capital hub idea is dependent on having an anchor tenant. West Bend Schools did not submit a meaningful proposal related to being an anchor tenant (they are requesting about 5,000 square feet). We have one proposal from a national charter school, and may have proposals coming from a local charter school and a potential catholic school option.
The social capital hub would also ensure that the theater remains available to the community. While the county is not really in the business of providing theater access, this is a nice perk for the community, and in this case something we should do since we easily can. This option also supports parents who want more choices for their children, and don't have the financial resources to afford private school. While the county is not in the business of expanding school options, that seems to be where our anchor tenant options are coming from. Personally, I am empathetic towards parents who are frustrated with the poor performance of West Bend Public Schools, and like the idea of expanded the choices available to parents.
If we cannot find a viable anchor tenant, are only remaining option is to sell the building and/or land. While I would prefer to implement the social capital hub, if it is not viable, then I have to accept that.
One final note: If the West Bend School District is truly worried about losing students, maybe they should focus on improving proficiency ratings (and not just on lowering the standards to inflate the numbers. West Bend currently loses a few hundred kids every year to open enrollment, with many of them enrolling into Germantown or Slinger while others get homeschooled (and we have a lot of children in our community who are being homeschooled).
When I looked at their proficiency rates, for the last year of the old (higher) standards, only 47.3% of kids in West Bend Schools can read at grade level (which they call "English Language Arts"), and only 50.9% of kids can do math at grade level. Under the revised, lower standards, for 2024 the numbers jump up to 59% reading at grade level and 64.9% performing at grade level on math. Those results make sense, as anytime you lower the standards, more kids will be able to meet that lower standard, so that's a great way for the state to hide declining academic outcomes for public schools in Wisconsin. In fact, statewide the proficiency averages for reading change from 40.4% to 50% and for math from 38.5% to 51%. Interestingly, West Bend schools had the lowest proficiency scores of any district in the County.
