Tax and Spenders Sing Praises for Bell and Holland
By
Tax and spenders Jamie Johnson and Jay Griggs sung the praises of school board candidates Brian Bell and Tom Holland in this week’s HSO. Gee, where have we seen those names before?
Mr. Johnson ran on the Democratic ticket against Kitty Rhoades several years ago and most recently was on the losing side of the 2003 referendum in Hudson. Here is Jamie’s letter to the editor in 2003 supporting higher taxes and of course trashing the opposition. Please note that his letter was NOT edited- See 2003 Letter
Jamie took awhile to resurface, but here is his letter of this week, again unedited- See Recent Letter
And then we have Jay Griggs. Just like Jamie Johnson, Jays Griggs took cheap shots at the concerned taxpayers during the 2003 referendum debate. What makes his letters more interesting is that Mr. Griggs is the former publisher of the Hudson Star Observer and his wife, Margaret Ontl, still works for the paper. Do you think Steve Dzubay and Randy Hanson edit his letters? Here is the Jay Griggs tirade from 2003- See Griggs Tirade
Just like Jamie Johnson, Jay Griggs has been in hiding as well, but here is his letter from this week, unedited- See Recent Letter
Unedited letters printed front and center in the paper and on the internet. Politics at its worst? You bet. Steve Dzubay wouldn’t have it any other way!
No related posts.
You might remember that Mr. Griggs was writing back then in support of a public referendum to build a $27 million dollar, two-grade middle school. He asserted in his conclusion that the three particular individuals (whom he did not name publicly) he was attacking were not armed with facts that supported the opposing position, but were distorting facts in a malevolent attempt to “jeopardize our children – future.” The message in his letter was clear; only he had the true facts, the facts clearly supported his position, and those in opposition could not possibly have the same prescience as he – but by default were anti-children zealots. As for Johnson, I don’t know much about him save he ran for assembly and lost when the teachers, I think, threw support behind Kitty Rhoades.
Well, the fall 2003 referendum was defeated by a margin of 72% NO to 28% YES – in the largest turnout, and greatest margin of defeat, in the history of a school referendum in Western Wisconsin… In fact, the margin of defeat was amongst the highest in state history. The school board was split on the matter prior to the election with two board members (Kaisersatt and Donovan) recommending not to take the matter to a referendum vote. One wonders if these two board members were also exercising malevolence towards our children’s future?
The economic facts on the ground in Hudson today, and the demographic trends those facts drive, are not supporting the demographers projections of 2003 (or most recently by Hazel Reinhart ” she has already revised hers down once), or Mr. Griggs premonitions of 2003. Has the area experienced growth? Of course. Is that growth heading in a straight line up and up with kids coming out of the windows? No. We all know the facts now, and clearly the growth in housing has all but dried up and what was the most important matter regarding demographics was the composition of the growth. Plus, the socio-economic facts and trends in 2002 and 2003 which led many, including Danielson and Weese, to conclude that the real issue with growth in the area was the composition; was there an over-abundance of kids in the mix or not. So far, it looks like the demographers who have been paraded into Hudson could take a demographics projection course from either or both of these fellas.
To try and gauge what might happen was simply not responsible in the minds of many, too many variables. To build on a projection from a green demographer from Madison, who used nothing more than a regression analysis (that did not build in key socio-economic issues) was also not responsible. Will the 1999- 2002 growth rate resume in the future, and therefore portend the need to build $75,000,000 worth of new infrastructure? No one knows. Fact is, neither no one could have known then what the reality is of today. And wasn”t that the point all along? Yes, I believe it was ” especially that of one Curt Weese.
The 8-9 referendum idea was bad one, the process that produced it was seriously flawed, and the promoters were being less than disingenuous in their assertions that all other options had been investigated. Mr. Griggs firmly placed himself in the hip pocket of one of the most polemical superintendent in the History of the area, Ron Bernth. Mr. Griggs placed his confidence in someone who very well may have made assurances regarding that referendum outcome. How many other citizens were bamboozled by Bernth? Well, seems to me a whole gaggle of them signed a petition of sorts that was printed in the Hudson Star Observer in a show of solidarity with all things gov-educational. All have egg on their faces, including Jay Griggs – all thanks to Ron Bernth.
I have no idea whether or not Jay Griggs was one of those who were busy getting all gussied up to head out to the Hudson Golf Club for the “victory party” that night, but it had to have been a very sobering experience when the returns showed a landslide vote of no confidence in the board and Bernth. Rather than the inebriated tax and spend toasts they were anticipating, the party balloons all burst as the polls closed. There are still those in Hudson (several of whom are currently sitting on the board) who clearly bear rather large chips on their shoulder over that election outcome.
Why would the Star Observer edit these two letters. They are pure “vanilla”. Nothing controversial, just solid endorsements for the candidate of their choice. Actually the letters are a plus for the Baker camp, Bell plus Holland probably equals a Baker win. I know I’m drifiting off the subject a tad, but it is all part of the mix. Try writing a “vanilla” letter in support of your candidate and see how much of it ends up on the cutting floor at the HSO.