I certainly haven't perceived this discussion as
having a tone of "why are we spending money on "those" kids". In fact, I'm
wondering why we weren't addressing these student needs (if there is actually a
need for a new building) before we were deciding on spending
huge money for new administrative offices.
Being on the politically incorrect
side of this argument, I would like to point out some things I question in how
the ALC proposal has been defended and debated of late;
* The fact that the current ALC building was once a
bar means what? If my house was once a church, does that make me
holy? Apparently it has served 100's of students and children
adequately for two decades.
* Claiming WAPS isn't actually building the
building is technically correct but points out how desperate the advocates of
this proposal are. Does anyone really think that this argument
actually resonates with the public? In fact, it further
undermines the credibility of those making it.
* Some proposed costs
associated with the moves from Lincoln have been in the media. Proposed
costs are seldom actual costs. Look at how the cost of renovating the
High School quickly escalated. Unlike Mr. Durand, I believe that Mr. Herold
is a man of his word and will get back to me (and WOD) with factual answers
to my question about all actual costs. He doesn't strike me as the type
who needs to enlist "shills" to act as his mouthpiece for the sake of his
political ambitions.
* The "don't our kids deserve better" argument is
worn out and still remains feckless yet insulting. It's like
asking "do you still beat your spouse?"
* Why is it okay for one group to attack
others (who they're always claiming don't care about kids) just
because they resist worshipping at the community temple of public
education? Don't they have the right to disagree and debate on how
the tithes they're forced to pay are spent on the temple? Recent decisions
by the high priests point out the need for more debate and a lot more prayer and
meditation.
* ISD861 money troubles are always blamed on
inadequate state funding. Both political parties have alternately held the
purse strings. Education funding has always been a top priority at
the legislature, about $13 BILLION just last year. Maybe the trouble
is actually due to the fact that we're simply spending it faster than we're
receiving it? There will never be an end to "good causes",
there will always be an end to the amount of money we can throw at
them. The success or failure of our district finances simply
depend on how we prioritize our
needs. This ALC spending decisions by the Board of
Education is elective. It is not the result
of "state mandates", which is usually where the blame is placed after the
inadequate state funding argument is challenged.
* The politically correct can be offensive
and condescending in their posts on WOD and their comrades with say
nothing. If the politically incorrect get offensive or
condescending, the PC attack them in droves.
* I often wonder who is really the author of
some of the recent WOD posts defending the district position on the proposed ALC
building. Me thinks they protest too much.
* How many more buildings will ISD861 build using
the leasing loophole? What will the next great cause be and when will we
hear about it? Will they give us more than three weeks to respond with a
better plan?
Debate is good for us, like it or
not......................
Mike Kirschmann
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 9:09
PM
Subject: [Winona] Fw: ALC
[Winona Online Democracy]
I don't know any of the students or faculty
at the ALC but I want my tax dollars to educate all the students in the
district - even those who some would rather write off, some who have
already been written off by people that should care about
them. This whole discussion has the tone of why are we
spending any money on "those" kids.
Other points made in this discussion seem to
forget the length of time the discussion of moving ALC has been going on, seem
to tie the costs of moving ALC to the closure of Lincoln building and suggest
that WAPS should have polished it's crystal ball a bit better when asking for
our tax dollars for the last levy. I suspect there would have been an
even larger outcry if the district had tried to ask for an undetermined amount
of money because 'we know the ALC will move, we just don't know where to
yet'.
The current efforts to relocate the ALC
have been going on for at least a year and a half and have been covered more
than once in each print media, regular updates at school board meeting, in
editions of Inside Your Schools (district's newsletter to all residents).
Even during Bartleson's tenure, plans
were in the works to relocate the middle and high school level Winona Area
Learning Center.
Placing the
program in existing district space was determined not workable for numerous
reasons, including vocal NIMBY; not in my back yard, opponents to those
locations.
Space has been considered
all around the community--at least 20 spots. Problems arose with location,
zoning, high costs of remodeling the space etc. , proximity to hazards, etc.
Also, if some of these business sites were used, that business would
then be taken off the tax rolls and this has a community impact.
There were attempts to develop a partnership with the City of
Winona.
On December 28 Mr. May presented his proposal to build a building
(WAPS is not building it) for the WALC students and children. His costs
seem to be in line with square foot costs for other locations.
Any other property the ALC would have relocated to would have also
been leased--state lease aid would be used.
Housing the
ALC far out of town--maybe Rollingstone or the Ridgeway Building--satisfies
the desire to have these kids out of the general population (for the NIMBY's).
However, it puts them far away from the services they regularly have
appointments with (Court Services, Human Services, Public Health etc.)
These remote sites are also not accessible by public transportation and also
make it more difficult for students to come from their work to school, or from
school to work.
These efforts were never financially tied to the
referendum or referenced to it as a supported expenditure of a successful
referendum.
I don't know who Mr. May is but I'm
grateful he stepped up to the table with a viable offer.
_______________________________________________
This message was
posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the
senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this
list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please
visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or
suggestions can be directed to
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you
want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page
at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
