[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] [Subject Index]

Re: school levy

Shirley, one lives in a democracy with freedom, choice and expectations.  My goals are to have the distinct stop the internal battling by the use of long term and fair contracts, educate all equally whether college bound or not, use this community's resources such as the University in dual enrollment opportunities, become accountable to the patronage, lengthen the school year that by keeping the kids in learning environments, have the district be aware of what is happening in its plans for the kids when they will face a world economy.  If you come by my office I will lend you economist Mark Skousen's book "The Making of Modern Economics" if you have not read this.  Also I published the comparison in the Newspaper two weekends before, well before the election.  I presented this before the Board last month.  Plus I am on record supporting the levy and my record on the Board was that I wanted to go to the patronage each year for a levy increase.  However, Joe Geiger and myself tied our resolution to long term contract arrangements.  The internal conflicts must stop and could be stopped easily by this one item.   Please read NEA President's 1997 speech before the National Press Club that talks about peer review, raising standards within the Profession, the idea of stopping 1930's union bargaining models, the idea of becoming competitive and innovative (changing).  The district was loosing enrollment before I came, yet this district was stuck in old patterns.  Further, there were a number of previous Board members that felt that the internal conflicts with the Union made reform impossible.  Teacher salaries and benefits while important are just part of the equation.  I am attaching the comparison and please note the beginning and the end.  Thank you Jerry    

At 05:53 PM 04/08/2002 -0400, wrote:

Gerry Weitz has paid $85 to have his bias about the Moscow schools included
in the April chamber newsletter.  As he is so inclined to do, he times this
thrust so that no reply can be arranged in another chamber publication prior
to the vote on the levy.

He compares Pullman's schools to Moscow's.  In his view, as we have seen,
Moscow comes up short.  I would certainly not argue that the Moscow schools
are perfect.  On the other hand, the two communities and their states are
different, and those differences will be reflected in the schools.

I am convinced that for the sake of this community and its children, we need
to support this levy.  It is ridiculous to argue that we must withhold the
funds until the schools improve.  Especially given what the state legislature
has done this session, the consequences will be terrible if the levy fails. 
I hope nobody doubts that the effects of hard times in public schools and
higher education will be felt by our businesses as well.

What a shame that an individual with so much ability as Weitz has such
capacity to be destructive.  Let's vote for the schools and our kids.  Then,
let's be sure we move in a direction that reflects our values.

Shirley Ringo


Back to TOC