The Tosa Ledger

LEAD — STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SAFETY

Why it matters:
District correspondence indicates there is no published student transportation safety plan. A student rail fatality this summer underscores the need for a visible plan, clear milestones, and immediate interim protections.

What changed:
Public-record requests show extensive Superintendent–City coordination and a confirmation that the District participates in Safe Routes to School; however, no published transportation safety plan exists, and study details have not been shared publicly.

Ledger angle:
In our view, coordination without a published plan creates avoidable uncertainty for families and potential safety gaps. The Board should treat this as a governance and safety priority with deadlines, public reporting, and interim protections.

With thanks to Heather Birk for surfacing this issue and elevating it with the District.

What to watch this week — Concrete fixes the Board can adopt now

• Publish transportation study details within 14 days: Scope, vendor, milestones, and completion date; publish to the District website and board packet.

• Agendize a public safety update: Include Sheriff and DPI participation; accept public comment; set follow‑up checkpoint.

• Implement interim mitigations now: Temporary busing and/or managed crossings for Madison‑area walkers who must cross the rail line until permanent protections are in place.

Tip: Use "shall" language, name the accountable owner, and set a reporting cadence (every board meeting until completion)

The Pattern to Print

Redefine "operations" as admin‑only → curb member independence/public voice → loosen safeguards where families expect the opposite (child safety, surveillance, facilities, finances). That’s how the balance of power gets rewired.

Call to Action (Ready to Copy)

Email the Board today:
“Publish the transportation study details within 14 days; agendize a public safety update with Sheriff/DPI participation; and implement interim mitigations (temporary busing/managed crossings) for Madison‑area rail walkers.”

Bring a one‑page Receipts to public comment — quote unchecked boxes and removed language.

Two years later, xCore Part I & II and recent Ledgers document similar mechanics at scale—administrative capture, diluted guardrails, routing complaints through the superintendent (Policy 9130), and after-the-fact board approvals. The deposition wasn’t just history; it foreshadowed a model that has since hardened into policy and practice.

Context Sidebar - What was the AVID issue? What was the Open Meetings Lawsuit? Community members raised conflict-of-interest concerns about the District’s use of the AVID program and staff ties to consultant Brett Bowers. Former board member Mike Meier filed an Open Meetings lawsuit alleging the District violated Wisconsin open-meetings requirements during certain board deliberations; the case materials are a matter of public record. 

Read more:

• xCore Report Part I

• xCore Report Part II

• Tosa Ledger - Vol. XV

INBOX — COMMUNITY QUESTIONS & TASK FORCE RESPONSES (THIS WEEK)

Topic #1: Salaries, superintendent compensation, and Ad Hoc attendance
Who wrote in: Task Force Member (email to the Task Force)

What was asked:

1. Have WSD teacher salaries for 2025–26 been confirmed/posted?

2. Has Superintendent Demond Means’s 2025–26 compensation been made public?

3. Is anyone from the 2030 Task Force attending the Secondary Schools Ad Hoc meetings, and any updates?

Task Force response (summary):

• Ad Hoc attendance/update: No current 2030 representatives attending those meetings. Our Onward update circulated last Friday; we can resend on request.

• Teacher salaries (2025–26): As of September 23, 2025, we do not see a finalized/posted 2025–26 teacher salary schedule on the District site or recent board agendas. The HR area hosts the standing “Teacher Compensation”document, but no newly dated 2025–26 schedule is visible.

• Superintendent compensation (2025–26): We do not see a posted contract addendum or agenda item setting the 2025–26 figure yet. For context, public records list $200,850 for 2024.

Next steps: We can file quick open‑records requests for (a) the 2025–26 salary schedule and (b) the 2025–26 superintendent contract addendum, and we welcome a volunteer at the Ad Hoc meetings to share notes. Further information: https://www.wauwatosaschools.org/page/secondaryschooladhoc2025

Topic #2: Facilities, Reuse, and City “Surplus” Framing
From: Onward Tosa (community coalition)
Also sent to: 2030 Task Force (shared with: WSD Board)

What changed (Sept. 16):
Four City officials presented to the Secondary Schools Ad Hoc, framing potential middle‑school closures in redevelopment terms (surplus property, tax base, traffic, rezoning).

Options under review: Six secondary‑school models ($149M–$351M); four of six would close both middle schools (Longfellow & Whitman). Community survey in October.

Task Force stance:

• Education‑first certification before any reuse — Board must publicly certify outcomes, safety/walkability, capacity/equity impacts, and 10‑year net public costs before any site is labeled “surplus.”

• Full transparency — publish appraisals, offers, incentives, and any City–District term sheets in real time; include caps, milestones, clawbacks, valuation floors, and public‑purpose findings.

• Real community voice — parents, teachers, neighborhoods at the table; share drafts, not just final deals.

• Guardrails on incentives — no TIF or below‑market transfers without independent valuation and measurable public benefit.

Why this is urgent: Recent draft policies (e.g., 7100, 7240, 7300, 7450, 7530) concentrate facilities powers while leaving guardrails optional—raising the risk of developer‑first outcomes.

Do this now:

• Read Tosa Forward News recap: https://tinyurl.com/8vhhm3v5

• Email the Board/Superintendent (cc your alders/Mayor) to demand education‑first criteria and real‑time publication of any reuse talks.

• Take and share the October survey when it opens.

Reusable lines:
“Educational quality must drive facilities decisions, not real‑estate deals.”
“If a school is labeled ‘surplus,’ the public deserves full visibility before decisions.”
“Any City–District framework must ban vague term sheets; caps, milestones, and clawbacks must be written and enforceable.

Topic #3: Comparative check — Wauwatosa vs. peer districts
From: Task Force Member (Sept. 19, 2025)
Ask: “Can we compare our superintendent’s policies to those in nearby successful districts (Elmbrook, Mequon‑Thiensville, Hartland‑Lakeside)?”

Task Force response:

• Delivered the 2030 Task Force Public Comparative Brief (09‑23‑25) — side‑by‑side using DPI 2023–24 report‑card data and public policy materials.

• Data signal: Wauwatosa trails peers on the overall DPI score and all four priority areas, with the sharpest gap in Target Group Outcomes (“equity”). On‑track components (e.g., 8th‑grade math, chronic absenteeism) also lag.

• Governance signal: Policy 9130 routes complaints through administration; oversight shifts from ex‑ante approvalto ex‑post reporting; facilities/land authority is consolidated with the Superintendent—patterns not mirrored in peers’ public materials.

• Remedies: Board‑visible complaint channel; restore child‑safety/data‑retention guardrails; reinstate pre‑approval thresholds for large purchases/contracts; publish quarterly KPI scorecards.

2030 Task Force Comparative Brief (09‑23‑25).

Community Note

Want the source docs and a plain-English summary each week? Subscribe to The Tosa Ledger or click Get Involved to join the 2030 Task Force.

Send documents, tips, or stories

Reply to this email or use the contact form at www.tosa2030.com. Anonymous submissions welcome; please include dates, docs, and specifics where possible.

Disclaimer

All views reflect testimony, public records, and editorial opinion. Allegations are supported with source documentation where noted. No conclusions are asserted here; all parties are invited to provide corrections or context. Right of reply: send corrections or context via the contact form at tosa2030.com/contact and we’ll review promptly for inclusion in the next issue. Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment.