Well, after what was it, a workshop and a retreat to try and find compromise that all 7 board members could support, in the end the boundary decision was a 4-3 vote, with not one of the 3 who voted no back in (July?) voting for the latest plan. It is clear Mr.
Rylance was correct when he told Mrs. Bowen and Mrs.
Weinsheim on Eye on Oshkosh that one of the 4 (Bowen,
Kavanaugh,
McDermott or
Weinsheim) would have to compromise as the other 3 were not going to. What is AMAZING to me is that the plan voted on Wed. night was essentially the plan that Schneider and Becker crafted at the retreat. I spoke to district officials who drafted the resolution and they spoke to both those board members telling them what was in the resolution and even working with Mr. Becker to revise the resolution prior to the board meeting(which is why they were referring to Mr.
McDermott's amendment as the SECOND amendment to the resolution). Neither member gave district officials any indication they did not support their own plan. Someone on
OshKonversation said they didn't support it because it was changed from their original proposal (hence the title of this post --- if I can't have it exactly my way I'm not voting for it --- that is NOT compromise) and I didn't hear either of them actually offer an amendment to be voted on to bring it back to the plan they developed.
Schneider did offer a suggestion to just deal with the high school issue (which of course would have unraveled the rest of the plan and was not the plan developed at the "retreat") but never actually verbalized an amendment the board could vote on. So what you were left with is those who voted for Option E back in the summer in the really interesting position of compromising by choosing the Roosevelt Option, thinking it would be a unanimous, or nearly unanimous vote and in the end they were in the very odd position of compromising with themselves.
Why this community wants people on the school board who work against the very interests of children is beyond me. Some board members seem determined to make sure the referendum fails, this referendum is needed to bring equity to our children, that is who will benefit the most --- not our staff, certainly not our administration, but our children.
One thing I found very interesting Wed. night was that Mr. Schneider --- staunch defender of respectful behavior at board meetings (he had a great deal of difficulty with me rolling my eyes at his comments) had NOTHING to say to the very disrespectful display put on by some of the citizens in the audience after the vote on the boundary resolution --- I just don't see how rolling eyes is MORE disrespectful than citizens shouting to board members things like "I hope you are proud of yourself", "nice work", "just wait till election time" and the most mature thing of all that occurred was the "citizen" who kicked a chair on his way out the door all because a resolution didn't go their way--- where was the "defender of respect" when all that occurred? Of course it really isn't respect for the board members or the board meeting he cares about, for some reason, he is just overly concerned with my thoughts about his comments and I guess he thinks he deserves respect over and above everyone else.
I am glad we are finally moving on to the rest of the facilities plan though I don't expect the 3 to compromise on anything left to come. And does anyone know why Becker and Schneider voted against hiring the architect? That is one of my pet peeves explain your NO vote!
Well I must pick up my children from school --- remember, keep comments on topic or they aren't going to be published.
7 comments:
I couldn't agree with you more about the behavior of some of the parents at the board meeting when the vote was finally taken (as well as the lack of displeasure on the part of Ben Schneider). They acted like spoiled brats who needed a time out. More disturbing is the fact that these very people are instilling morals and discipline into their children. I hate to see the way some will turn out. Unfortunately being a bully is something we see way too much of these days -- in local office, in business and, yes, even on blogs.
Anonymous Nov. 10-1:22)
I too wonder what these parents are teaching their children... if you don't get your way, throw a fit, say nasty things and threaten a lawsuit. I feel sorry for those children, not because they will go to a new school and meet new people but because their parents have set them up for this to be something awful.
I had a friend who wanted a boundary line changed so her children could continue at a school they were open enrolled to, the change didn't happen but instead of whining about how awful this would be for the children, she told them how wonderful it would be, they would make new friends... needless to say, after a few weeks, not only were her children happy in their new school, turns out, she was happier with them at the new school than she ever was at the old school. Just goes to show what attitude can do.
The whole threat of a lawsuit is so ridiculous. Frist of all, will these people sell their houses just to prove their value went down? And even if they do, everyone knows the real estate market is tanking, so you will never be able to prove that a boundary changes is the reason you got less for your home. I higly doubt in the next reassessment by the city the value of homes will decrease. I think the threat of a suit is without merit and hopefully a judge would throw the case out at the onset and the district wouldn't even have to spend taxpayer dollars on lawyers to defend such a ridiculous suit. Districts all over the state and country change boundaries and close schools, to pretend that Oshksoh cannot do that because we might be sued is so far out there it is not worth considering.
Does anyone else find it confusing those parents who are so distressed that their child might have to go to school without every one of their current friends that they will send them to some other school (like Newman or Lourdes or Winneconne) uh, doesn't that ALSO send them to school without their friends? I guess that is "payback" to the district for not doing what they wanted. How spoiled and selfish.
I hope before the facilities plan goes to the board for a vote we will hear what the larger community thinks of the plan, not just the parents who don't want their children moved.
I'm pretty sure that Plan "B" no referendum will look pretty ugly. IF we have NO money to repair any of our schools, we have to keep all of our schools open (which will mean inefficient staffing or lots of split classes) we will not be creating any equity we can forget about distributing our special needs population to neighborhood schools, that will be way too expensive if we have to keep all 23 schools open.
I'm not convinced this community will not support a referendum, I think the majority of those who say that, have their views colored by not getting their way, but let's face it, the majority of voters do NOT have children in school and will not hinge everything on a boundary change they don't like.
NOTE: All the DELETED COMMENTS on this thread have been moved to the 4K thread as they relate to that subject.
This thread is still open for comments about the "compromise" re: boundary lines
Post a Comment