As I tracked the election results last night, I noticed that the proposed $80,000,000 NAFC referendum was defeated by the voters. How does anyone think this will impact the proposal GCS puts forward, and/or how will it change the strategy for GCS attempting to pass theirs.
Will The Failure of the NAFC Referendum Impact GCS Efforts
Posted 06 May 2015 - 05:45 AM
I think GCCS' referendum will also fail no matter what strategy they try. I'd hate for them to spend hundreds of thousands on an advertising campaign that is ultimately doomed from the start. That money would be better spent in the classrooms than trying to convince voters to raise their taxes.
In GCCS I've yet to hear a voter genuinely feel GCCS *NEEDS* the money.
In WCCS, the voters (at least in town) overwhelmingly talk in support of a new high school at Silver Creek and are in favor of a referendum. It's the school board that is being cautious and holding back.
Just my experience from the streets.
Posted 06 May 2015 - 06:21 AM
I will NOT support the referendum.
I will support getting a new school board member.
Just like the rest of us, the school board needs to learn to get by with what they have.
Posted 06 May 2015 - 06:44 AM
I was told that Melin was trying to get the Mayor to help get some of the money through the tif. Now, I'm not 100% sure how that works. The Mayor did tell Melin no. I also know the Mayor emailed Melin asking to be on the committee to find a new basketball coach and Melin told him thanks but no thanks. So it looks like Melin and his board of 4 will try to get the money some other way. I think what they need to do is cut staff at the admin building. They have entirely too many overpaid employees that don't hit a lick. But until the voters do something about it nothing will change.
- GrumpyGranny and Avid Reader like this
Posted 06 May 2015 - 08:13 AM
I will NOT support a referendum either. Greater Clark does not need fancy new schools and $100 million or so from the taxpayers. They have spent millions on these ridiculous Chromebooks and recently spent $4.5 million on a radio station. Yet they cut back on teachers.
There is also NO TRANSPARENCY. They have refused to release the Kovert Hawkins study to the taxpayers --- who paid over $120,000 for it -- while they plot, plan, strategize and connive to get their referendum developed in such a way that they can pass it off on unwary taxpayers. The Kovert Hawkins study was completed January 31, 2014 -- yes that is right -- almost a year and 1/2 ago -- and they refuse to release it.
They hired an outside consultant - Steve Klink -- who was not mentioned until the News & Tribune printed a story about a month ago. As someone who follows the Board Docs closely, I had never seen any contract presented or approved to hire Mr. Klink. When I recently obtained a copy of said contract, it was signed and dated July 9, 2014. So I searched the board docs again around that time to see if there was an action item presenting and approving his contract. There was none. Then I discovered that it was listed under the Consent Agenda Item #6 -- "Personnel - Other - Communications Consultant Approval. The only detail under this item says the following:
Recommendation: The Superintendent recommends engaging the services of a Communications Consultant.
Background Information: A Communications Consultant is needed to provide assistance for the promotion of future development efforts in Greater Clark.
Submitted by: Andrew Melin, Superintendent
The actual contract is not attached to the Board Docs -- as most contracts are -- There is NO mention of Steve Klink or his company (Tuesday Communications). There is NO mention of a referendum although the contract is definitely for the purpose of preparing the school system to undertake and pass a referendum. The contract is for $50,000 --- and an additional amount if the referendum passes.
In my opinion, this is deceptive --- clearly they were trying to hire a consultant for the purpose of passing a referendum yet not telling the public who/what they were doing. It is highly "secretive" -- they obviously did not want the taxpayers to know anything about their plans until they were ready to shove them down our throats. Every single school board member should be ashamed. There is absolutely NO TRANSPARENCY. It is just a game to try to get unwary taxpayers to approve millions of dollars for new schools and yet let them have little or no real information.
I do not like deception. Let's hope the rest of the taxpayers do not either. This referendum should be voted down resoundingly. The taxpayers deserve better -- the children deserve better. The board talks about "transparency" but they do not seem to know what the word even means. I for one will work diligently against any attempt by the school system to pass a referendum.
Edited by IntegrityMatters, 06 May 2015 - 08:13 AM.
- kelley likes this
Posted 06 May 2015 - 04:29 PM
I'll join the chorus here: I will not support the referendum either. I probably would support it if I thought that it was needed and that it would truly benefit our kids and their teachers, but it seems to me that there's too much waste and largess at the top. In my opinion, that needs to be trimmed before the taxpayers are asked for more.
- Avid Reader likes this
Posted 08 May 2015 - 12:51 PM
Folks, I moved the posts relating to the GCCS 119 million referendum and the closure of the schools to a new thread...GCCS Referendum for 119 Million.
- IntegrityMatters and kelley like this
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users