Patzert: New Chippewa Valley Policy is ‘One of the Worst’ Ever Passed

After months of , the Chippewa Valley Schools board of education at last passed a policy on the commemoration and naming of district facilities by a 5-1 vote Monday.

Trustee Andrew Patzert, who cast the only opposing vote, called the decision “one of the worst policies I’ve ever seen.”

The new policy creates a series of guidelines to allow the naming of school facilities to recognize individuals who have made extraordinary contributions to the district.

Patzert, who opposed such a policy from the beginning, argued his belief that no matter how many guidelines are put in place for the nomination process, the process will never be fair.

“I think we’re just opening up a can of worms, because every person that retires, that coaches for a long time, who is involved in the band ... there is a group that thinks, ‘That’s the guy,’” he said. “I think we should stay away from it and leave life the way it is.”

However, the majority of the board disagreed with Patzert and passed the policy.

While certain steps of the process are still being fine-tuned, the board did establish that in order to be nominated for such recognition, an individual must have worked in the district for a minimum of 15 years and have been separated from the district, either by retirement, death or other means, for a period of four years.

“In my mind, you have a process and whether they are alive or dead they might be deserving,” said Trustee Euel Kinsey. “The whole point of the dedication is to put something up in perpetuity to remind people of what that person meant to that district.”

This policy does not relate to the naming of school buildings, but only facilities such as gyms, libraries, science labs and the like.

In response to Patzert’s concern that nominations will be made only when emotions are running high, such as following an individual’s untimely death, Trustee Frank Bednard said that is why the process has been made "arduous" and “designed so we don’t have that emotional response pushing the board to make a decision overnight.”

The sheer number of requirements and time deadlines included in the nomination process should prevent such emotional judgments from being made.

Despite the policy passing, Patzert maintained, “the whole thing is crazy.”

“I don’t really see it serving the purpose of awarding a person who is deserving,” he said. “I see it for naming a facility for a person who came to an untimely end.”

When fully defined, the nomination process will include a number of guidelines requiring recommendation letters from students, staff and community members, budget proposals if there is a cost involved and final decision by a committee of department representatives, staff and community members.