Elmbrook votes 5-2 to increase non-resident enrollment

That’s right. Last year they voted 46 new open enrollment seats. The next school year will see 74 openings. According to board member Tom Gehl, the new number looks like it will bump the percentage of non-resident to resident students over the 10% ceiling adopted a few years ago.

So, who voted for the 74 students? Can’t tell you for sure. Meg Wartman did vote to increase the number of students. She was on camera so that could be seen. The two no votes were both male voices, but six of the board members are men. That’s all the detail you get, folks. (And to think I wasted an hour trying to find out!) If someone would like to own up to the votes, that would be lovely.

Board members spent a lot of that hour patting themselves on the back for not accepting the original staff recommendation of 133 new slots. I have to say, when I see a decision like this made, I wonder if we’ve been set up. Did they propose the higher number initially to let the board members look like heroes when there was a reduction from the initial plan? Keep in mind, taxpayers, that there was still a decision to increase non-resident enrollment last night.

The board and staff worked from a document that was not made available to the public. I am working to get it and will post the financial implications.

They worked from numbers we can’t review. They voted to bust through a previously respected 10% ceiling. Except for one, we don’t have any idea which board members voted yes or no.

There’s no accolade coming from this cheering section.

PS – Mr. Charles Wickens spoke on a couple of issues that I watched. Katie Lemcke spoke in favor of the higher number rejected on open enrollment. Both are running for the seat held by board president Meg Wartman. (We’ll be saying hello to Ms. Wartman for another 3 years.)


  1. What was Ms. Lemke’s rationale?

  2. More money has to be good for the district, and won’t we find 200 district students from somewhere someday?

    I have it recorded if you really want it.

  3. Interesting. The District had talked of (de facto) shutting down open enrollment over the next few years.

    Apparently there are less Elmbrook-native children than we thought.