Future plans,

from p. 1

Weyer also clarified that he didn’t want the Loyal board’s vote to not co-op sports at this time to be perceived as Loyal not being interested in future collaboration.

“The community survey to me is different than a sports co-op… I think the goal of our motion at the last meeting was not to say ‘no.’ Unfortunately, it might have gotten spun to, ‘Well, Loyal said no to this.’ And I think the goal was, ‘Let’s pause and do the research to make the decision.’ At least that’s why I voted the way I did,” said Weyer. “And I hope over the course of the next year we have those conversations with Greenwood and develop the timeline necessary. Because I do feel that by 2028 we are going to have to co-op, if not every sport, multiple sports.”

Loyal’s current referendum is set to expire in 2028, and Greenwood’s proposed referendum, if passed, would also expire in 2028.

Roehl said the Greenwood community seemed “pretty upset” over the Loyal board’s sports decision, and told his fellow board members they needed to think about how to move on to continue good relations between the schools.

“I think they want us to move forward. I think we’ve got to show some good faith. I think they felt kinda slighted that we’ve had all these conversations and didn’t get to where they were thinking it should go. I think we have to get together as a board and figure out where we are and what we’re looking for,” said Roehl.

He said his Plan A for the future of the Loyal School District was to work with Greenwood, and after that, he didn’t know.

“What if Greenwood says they don’t want to work with us? Then where are we gonna go? I don’t have a Plan B right now,” he said.

He asked each of the board members what their Plan A and B was. All the board members said working with Greenwood was their Plan A. Carrie Becker and Roehl said they didn’t have a Plan B at the moment, while the other board members suggested coming up with an agreement between multiple area schools for their Plan B, such as Loyal, Granton, Greenwood and Owen-Withee all working together, or some combination of those four.

“I’m waiting to see what the financial study says regarding what does it look like if we were to consolidate. The question will be, can we continue to remain as an independent school and just collaborate and share services, versus consolidate,” said board member Tom Odeen.

“I agree with Tom. I think we move forward with the feasibility study that the community has all but said that they want us to do, and we see where that goes,” said Weyer.

Odeen said he also wanted to know what the costs would be to run sports and other extracurriculars separate versus combined, and that would drive decision-making.

“So what’s our leap of faith or our show of good faith to Greenwood here? What’s our plan with sports? Do we do something with that or do we work on the educational stuff?” said Roehl. “I think we got to come up with some kind of a show of good faith that ‘Hey, we still wanna partner with you.’” “And the comment was made at our last meeting: We are. We are co-oping football this year and let’s see it play out. That’s step one. And if that goes good, we can look at numbers again. And maybe there’s another sport. It might be where we can’t co-op every sport all at once… Let’s take a sport-by-sport approach to it,” said Weyer.

Roehl suggested having another public meeting with just Loyal people, to gather community feedback, in hopes of getting the board members and community on the same page. Board member Harlan Hinkelmann said he was not opposed to a public meeting, but everyone on the board “was sick of getting beat up.”

“I’m all for listening, but we need people to give their thoughts in a civil manner,” he said.

Roehl also asked for Chris Lindner’s perspective on relations between the schools.

“Trust me; I heard it the next day a bunch (after the Loyal board decision). So there was a lot of damage control that I tried to deal with. I just see things on the horizon — we have a lot invested in our work with Greenwood, whether it’s calendars, schedules, HRS (High Reliability Schools) — and I don’t want to see everything we’ve done go down the drain.

“Can we collaborate together for a while? I can see that. But I think that for logistics, Greenwood is the best partner for us. Can I see other schools in the future? I think, yes. I think in our county, that’s going to be a necessity, for the simple fact that otherwise it’s going to be, it’ll happen anyway, but you’ll have five years, referendum; five years, referendum. Unless something happens down at the state, which it hasn’t in forever. So we need to be resourceful in

howwe're doing things.

'I think our proximitylends us to doinga lot of things together. If you look at the survey, take it for what it is, but it's definitely in favor of at least continuing to look at support(and) doing stuff with them and into consolidation. Maybe consolidationlooks a little different. In talking with Mike Beighley down from Whitehall, he's like that's why they are doing their four schoolsas long as they can andcan really be resourceful the way they are.'

The Trempealeau Valley Cooperative consists of the cadia, Blair-Taylor, Independence and Whitehall school districts.They are in a seven-year agreement that started July1, 2018.

Chris Lindner reminded the board that this discussion started with staffing and that even in looking for a principaljust recently, he was reminded that the pool of was low. So, said it was imperative plan aheadso the school has a partner or partners for the future.

The board members tossed aroundthe idea of having a public forum to gather input, but questioned whether the right time.

'My question is, what new information is there to gather or put out at this point in time, since we know that the purpose of the survey was now to do a study?' 'Because study, then you're going to have information to look at, analyze, discuss.' yer recommended waiting until Baird did the , whichwill take eight to 12 weeks and cost $6,000 perschool district, and then analyzing the results and where to go from there. ent Kubista in attendance 'The last time you guys talked aboutthis, in 2007, what was the stickler at the end that stopped consolidating? It was there and discuss what you're study done, and it was agreed upon that whatever that group came up with is what both school districts were gonna do. And what happenedat the end of that incident? Where the high and when was Loyal, that's when it was bailed out on. I hate to bring up the elephant in the oom, but that's what it's always been. Sure, everyone's like, 'Let's work together,' but then when it comes down agreement, it ends.

'And I'm not saying to do it or not to do it, but that's the thing, the numbers. It's collaboration right now. What's that helping with? Is it saving us money, is that what e looking at, or is it costing us money? The numbers, that's what the parents need to understand. What do we want? What is the end point? Right now, both schools are ee. If you talk about putting it in a middle area, somewhere between the two, now figure out what it is per e foot to build that school. Think about the millions and millions and we can't pass a referendum right now... So that's the answers I would like to find.'

'Isn't that what Baird does, though?' said school board memberHollyLindner.'They go throughall of that stuff and say this is what it would cost to build a new building could utilize both buildings have nowand what way is the most efficient.'

'It certainly would be more information that we could esent to the public,' said Odeen. The board decided to schedule the aforementioned ch 17 meeting to get an overview from Baird of what

a study?” asked Principal Doug Dieckman. “Because after the study, you’re information to analyze, discuss.”

Weyer recommended waiting until Baird did the study, will take eight to 12 weeks and cost $6,000 school district, and then analyzing the results and determining where to go from there.

Parent Matt Kubista was in attendance and chimed in. “ what stickler at the end that stopped consolidating? Does anybody remember? It was to sit there and discuss it, what you’re talking about now, to have a study done, was agreed upon that whatever that group came what both school districts And at the incident? high school was gonna be, and when it was Loyal, that’s when was hate to bring up the elephant room, that’s what it’s always been. Sure, everyone’s ‘Let’s together,’ comes down to an agreement, it ends.

“And I’m not saying to do it or not to do it, but that’s thing, the numbers. It’s collaboration right now. What’s that helping with? Is it saving us money, is that what we’re looking at, or is it costing us money? The numbers, that’s what the parents need to understand. What do want? What is the end point? Right now, both schools debt-free. If you talk about putting it in a middle somewhere between the two, now figure out what per square foot to build that school. Think about the millions and millions and we can’t pass a referendum right now… So that’s the answers I would like to find.”

“Isn’t does, though?” school board “They go all stuff what it would cost to build a new building and how we could utilize both buildings that we have and what way is the most efficient.”

“ certainly more information could present to the public,” said Odeen.

The board decided to schedule the aforementioned March 17 meeting to get an overview from Baird of what the study will entail, and then await the results.