Stack the Deck
By
Here is the list of the School Board appointed “Long Range Planning Committee” that started meeting last week. How many on this list voted against the $54 million failed referendum last April?
Considering the majority of New Richmond School District residents voted against the referendum, wouldn”t it have been smart to include a more representative cross section of New Richmond voters?
Perry Atterholt, Middle School Parent
Mike Ballard, Administration
Trent Benning, High School Teacher
Jerry Brown, Economic Development Commission
Kent Elkin, Chamber of Commerce
John Hackbarth, WITC
Brian Johnston, Administration
Lester Jones, Board Member
Bill Knutson, Middle School Teacher
Pat LaVenture, “Do” Group
Andy Lieffort, “Yes” Group
Ann Mike, High School Parent
Jeff Moberg, Administration
Chad Murray, Elementary Parent
Scott Needham, Facilitator
Karen Pape, Elementary Teacher
Judy Remington, Board Member
Dave Schnitzler, Mayor
Chris Skoglund, Board Member
John Vandyk, Town of Erin Prairie Rep
Steve Wojan, Administration
Bob Ziller, Senior citizen
The deck is stacked with this group. Everyone on this list voted for the referendum last April.
Hmmm, any wonder what this group will recommend?
Related posts:
- River Crest Funnel Paid Off? Well Maybe….. River Crest Funnel Finally Paid Off? The funnel under County F connecting the River Crest Elementary campus and Camp St. Croix has been fully funded...
Hey aren’t you guys missing one person? Somerset had 23 and Hudson had 23. Somebody really screwed this thing up. I think you need to go back to the drawing board.
They probably figured to save the trouble of adding an additional member knowing that one member will have the guts to call this for what it is a scam and then quit. New Richmond residents can save themselves from a lot of useless mailings by just recycling the ones from Hudson. This whole process is right out of the ATS&R playbook. It is not about the kids; it is all about the money. Using football vernacular, this team of idiots cannot handle the blitz. Take a look in Hudson; the ATS&R stacked process, whose solutions were approved by the board a year ago, never left the station and they have been back-peddling ever since.
So right you are Dr. Crier. The way this stacked force is looking, they could conceivably come back with a referendum OVER $100 Million. But you know Linda Schroeder, who “facilitated” the Hudson Task Farce, needs a little spending money for Christmas. Remember that she is a retired public “servant” just like Hazel and several of the people from ATS&R. After all, it’s all about the money, uh I mean kids isn’t it?
After the $54 million referendum failed, the Board was repeatedly told:
“build trust”
“reach out to concerned voters”
“ask for ideas and opinions”
“seek input”
Instead – they created an echo chamber that shouts back at them only what they want to hear. While at the same time, they continue to make the same arrogant decisions as a Board.
The letter in the paper this week – was quite revealing. It captured the sentiments of the community well. The Board is not capable of making good decisions and has limited to no confidence of the voters.
If the Echo Chamber thinks they are building support by manipulating a “survey”, holding a “listening session”, creating a phony “planning committee”, they will be proven wrong once again.
It is easy to see their manipulation at pre-determining the results of each of these steps.
They don’t want genuine input. All they want to hear is agreement with their desire to build and spend the taxpayers money.
They fail to understand that people genuinely want to voice their opinions and be heard. The Echo Chamber’s doors are locked shut.
Well said NR Resident. Interestingly enough, this comment could be said about the Somerset board, the Hudson board, the River Falls board, the Prescott board, the St. Croix Central board, etc., etc., etc. When you have a system that is manipulated by the employees and their friends, it is very difficult to find accountability anywhere.
The important number is not the total size of the long range planning committee; it’s the size of the employees and board members. We have 11 school employees and board members on the committee which works out to a nice round 50 percent.
I hear a lot of talk about “the failed referendum,” which fails to mention it lost by a lousy 20 votes. The next referendum will fail by a lot more if it’s the same blank check as the last one.
There are things that need to be done to the school buildings, but not new everything. People need choices such as separate referendums for land, remodeling and any new building. People are not supid. I’ll take a crummy school building if we get students that perform above average.
And don’t give me this ‘echo chamber’ accusation. I’m on the committe and I don’t consider myself a yes man. If the committee comes down on the irrational and impractical they’ll hear about. But I’ll be damned if I’m going to back away from giving it the old college try. So far I sense some whiners with not solutions.
At the first LRPC meeting we selected the 11-year population projections on page 42 of the Hazel Reinhardt Repot. Before anyone brings up the canards about Reinhardt being a hired gun and population projections are always wrong, come up with your own projections–and I don’t mean gut feels, personal opinions with no research, or WAG’s (wild assed guesses).
I was surprised that her projections were as low as they were. Her number’s came in at 3.125%/yr. compounded out to 2016. Anybody have better numbers? I’ll be interested.
Future activities and information on the New Richmond School district long range planning committee will come out on the http://NewRichmond.blogspot.com. Welcome.
Hey bobz, did anyone ever build a school in the past based on “projections”? ANY PROJECTION is a WAG, it’s just that some people who provide the WAG get paid handsomely to do it. If you think that you should build new buildings based on a 10 year projection, then have at it. If you think that we don’t spend enough money and the school district needs more, then have at it. When you approve a referendum you are simply giving more money to a system that is broken. Until the system is fixed, N. Onimous says VOTE NO!!!
Use your wisdom Z-man. But don’t be upset that you are the Senior Citizen designate.
Maybe you can use this Senior Citizen position to raise alternative options to what the Vote Yes wants. Maybe Bill Derrick Sr. – ideas have merit. Explore them. Don”t just accept that a new high school is needed.
Are their other options?
Will you go along with the crowd?
Last winter/spring, you had a letter in the New Richmond News advocating for the $54 million referendum. Then you went silent after the WIDOT letter your lunch buddy Hitchens was secretly hiding. What did he tell you about that?
Are you a fiscal conservative Z-man or just another liberal who likes to spend the taxpayers money?
The results will be interesting to see.
Yes I don’t like to be called a senior citizen which to me is condescending and implies an Azlheimers patient. I feel I contributions to make and will use my own brains to analyze options. By the way I am for full investigation of Derrick’s proposal of the 25 acres for expansion of the HS. I happen to be from Greekville and want an education for NR students that will allow them to compete with India and China. I don’t care if the football team ends up allstate, I want the students to end up allstate in science, language, math, and most important of all, thinking. From there they have the foundation to do anything.
Don’t jump to the conclusion that because I am on the long range planning committee, I am braindead. Is the education flawed? Yes by about 50 percent, but do you think I am going to leave the K-12 kids hanging while we spend years trying to get vouchers, school choice and parents paying for the full ride of their children in private schools. I’de like any one of these, but democracy is messy and takes time.
As for all you blog posters hiding behind the CB handles, get some guts and use your real names. Stand up for what you believe.
Bob Ziller, 1231 172nd Ave., New Richmond WI 54017, 715-246-6237
10-4 Good Buddy
Uh, Breaker One-Nine, this here’s the Rubber Duck
You got a copy on me Pig-Pen? C’mon
Uh, yeah 10-4 Pig Pen, fer sure, fer sure
By golly it’s clean clear to Flag-Town, C’mon
Cause we gotta little ol’ convoy, rockin’ through the night
Yeah we gotta little ol’ convoy, ain’t she a beautiful sight?
Come on an’ join our convoy, ain’t nothin’ gonna git in our way
We’re gonna roll this truckin’ convoy, cross the USA
Convoy… Convoy…
convoy, cross the USA
Convoy… Convoy…
from the 1978 hit “Convoy” by Bill Fried and Chip Davis
Ziller, this is not a trick question and there is a reason for my madness. I hope admin will give me a few threads of commentary between Mr. Ziller and me. Question: What is the underlying purpose of the task force?
The reason for my question is this: If the task force is charged with bringing forth a government solution, i.e. buildings, based on the projections of Hazel Reinhardt and capacity as defined by ATS&R; then the task force is useless as far as problem-solving. A majority vote on the board is all that is needed to bless the scenarios as presented by ATS&R. In this case, the task force only serves the purpose of providing cover and in blunt terms, it is nothing more than a propaganda tool for the passage of a referendum. And who is the beneficiary of a successful referendum, ATS&R
Dr. Ziller, your task force looks no different in composition than the one our school board assembled here in Hudson. It’s not representative of your community and neither was ours. How do I know that? Our task force voted 22-1 to proceed with an $83.5 Million Referendum and made their presentation to our board on December 14, 2004, almost 1 year ago. Even with a 22-1 vote our school board is paralyzed and won’t even consider going to referendum. This is a very good indication that the deck was stacked in Hudson, just like it is in New Richmond.
As far as having guts, I would challenge you to find someone who has stuck their neck out as far as I have in calling for accountability in public education. And keep in mind that I still have three kids in the system. I won’t give out my address, but it’s in the phone book.
The problem with a large, stacked task force is “group-think”. Check out the Wikipedia explanation of group think here. Coined by a pyschologist in 1972, the original definition was: “a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.” The Hudson task force displayed almost every symptom of group-think, especially the desire for unanimity. Your task force, bobz, will have a hard time not succombing to this pitfall also.
If you have the delusion that these task forces are designed to gather community input from a number of diverse perspectives then try this approach. Under Wisconsin law it only takes one member to request a recorded vote on every decision that is made. In Robert’s Rules this is known as calling for “division of the assembly” and by state law every subunit of a governmental body must record the vote of each member if called for by any member.
Don’t be surprised to meet a bit of opposition on this. They will claim it isn’t necessary, isn’t effecient, and isn’t productive. You see yourself as an independent thinker on the task force. One of the advantages of recorded votes is that the thinking of the other members is revealed. Alone you may not be able to change the pre-determined course of the group. Wouldn’t it be easier if you could identify four or five others that have the ability to also think independently? You may have to make a motion and struggle to get a second. Or you may cast the lone dissenting vote against a motion.
Here are two examples from you first meeting where this would have value. First, the decision to use 10 year enrollment projections is of critical importance. The Hudson group was supposed to use a shorter time frame but chose to extend the study to a 10 year scope. This made it very easy to discard any suggestions for remodeling, renovation or expansion of current facilities. The same will be true in NR. You have already been manipulated. What was the vote on this? Was this really a unanimous decision? Second, you can urge the school board to begin a study on year-round schools, charter schools, and magnet schools as vehicles to increase student performance. Or you can make a motion: Resolved, that the task force urges NRSD to…” and put it to a vote. One is just commentary. The other is action. Good luck getting a second.
Keenan, I really appreciate your suggestions. The groupthink piece impressed me so much that when it first came out I printed it out for use by the DO group.
Your intuition is right–the adaption of the 11-year projection was accepted without a recorded vote. Nothing was said about Roberts Rules, but should a division of the assembly be requested, I think Scott Needham would accept it. We’ll see.
Curt, I respect you immensely for what you did in running for the Hudson board and the crap you took at the meetings. Had you been elected, it would have given taxpayers an opening. We have that in New Richmond with two members that can do some thinking.
As for NR Resident, what does the lyrics of “Convoy” have to do with furthering this discussion?
In general, I have yet to see numbers on student population projections from this group. We need some numbers for any kind of long range planning. We could reject the 11-year projection, but what numbers do we use: Reinhardt’s 5-years? If we accept those, why not all 11 years? Well, because further out is less accurate. Why are the first five years accurate?
Using no projection pulls the rug out from any long range planning. Anyone want to use flat or negative population increases? If we say spend no money at all, that’s a plan too, I guess.