TheSacNews.com October 14, 2009 Issue 68
Reader wants stop signs onS 9th
Twice a day I cross the street at Audubon and9th, and I can tell you people turning off Main down 9th just plain GUN it. If I had kids on 9thI’d be damned worried.
Melissa Bellcock “O.K.” withunder-representing voters
I personally heard you say that you were for mel-lisa bellcock before the election.. and now you are bashing her. do you change your mind in 5 secondsor are you just hipocritical. Stop judging becauseobviously we all know you dont like people judgingyou. Everyone needs to stop and think about if theyrealy want there kids to go to a school were their town is not represented at all and the superintendentcould not care one ounce about sac city.
1. What I said was that I thought Martha and Me-lissa would be elected. This did not mean that I wasvoting for them, though your enthusiasm for Melissamay have led you to believe that my prediction wasan endorsement.2. Actually I’m disappointed when I open up my
email and don’t nd hatemail. People judging me
makes life spicy!3. *shrug* Shirley Phillip’s puppets, Melissa Bell-cock and Dave Sands were not brave enough tospeak these strongly held views of yours at the public hearing tonight. Maybe if they had, the AEA board wouldn’t have approved the petition and al-lowed the vote to move forward… You should showup on Oct 19th at the Anti-East Sac County SchoolBoard Meet and ask them why they dropped the ball.
So you want your child to go to a school wherehe will become just a number and the town that theyare from has no representation and becomes forgot-ten about? (which essentially means that the childrenfrom that town may be forgotten about)
My opinions are only my own and I understandthat everyone including you and me has the right totheir opinions. I can not vote in february, however Igraduated from Sac which is why I care about whatis happening. Could you post a poll on your site ask-ing people how they will possibly vote concerningthe consolidation given that the board members will be elected at large?
…Except that the board members will not be
elected at large. The rst members of the interim
board will be appointed from within the makeup of the members of those two boards by the existing two boards and will exist in that form for about 1.5 to
2 years. At the time of the next election, there will be the opportunity to elect board members in anyway that is allowed by Iowa law, which means thatthe “2,2,1” method currently advocated seemingly by everyone on earth, (but me,)* is totally possible.Given the current “evil” status that has been attrib-uted to the “at large” method the “2,2,1” method ismaybe even probable.There are two things that widely publicizing the “atlarge” voting issue has served to do.
1. It makes voting as a single unied school district
seem like a bad thing, (and by association, damage
the core concept of unifying the schools in the rst
place.)2. It handed Shirley Phillips, the president of theschool board that voted to play politics with theschool’s basic ability to do shared business by nolonger regularly meeting as a joint board, a puppetcandidate who will vote the way that the candidateis told to vote, thus prolonging the divisive policiesthat stand in the way of smoothly transitioning into
one unied district.
There are only two sides here. The side that wants togo forward and unite the schools and avoid havingthe quality of our education decrease at the same rateas our populations, and the side that wants to sowdiscord between the towns in order to use that ani-mosity to attain more political power, and increasetheir own paychecks.This whole concern about “what’s best for Sac City”evaporates once you have a child that is facing alower quality education as the result of a factionthat is obsessed with using one particular buildingover another. Nobody ever wants to say this be-cause it’s so “negative” but our future reality is asa bedroom community for the neighboring countieswhose directors of development are actually focusedon bringing in jobs, (as opposed to playing politicalgames.)Luring in one mid-sized business per decade is clear-ly not bringing Sac County the growth that it needsto sustain itself into the future. It may be that therewill be a different development entity in the future
that will be able to actually nd businesses to cometo Sac County, and at that time we may nd ourselves
growing and in need of a more localized school dis-trict.** Until that future happens, it seems to me thatour primary concern is leave the emotion out of itand to make the business decision to consolidate our schools in such a way as to keep enough spendingauthority happening to provide our children with aquality education. —–
I feel that if the interim board chooses to hold elec-
tions in a way that reects their own divided politics
that will encourage the voters to continue to think of themselves as two separate factions.
As I write this, it occurs to me that if I were thedirector of an entity that is trying to lure businessto Sac County, I would be ENCOURAGING thegrowth of a strong school in the fastest growing cityin the county, instead of standing in its way. Maybein light of all the fail that has thus far happened on thedevelopment end of things in this county, the pow-ers that be actually have this whole thing backwardsand think fail = succeed. (Actually, the more likelyscenario from my observation is that the individu-als who would be good at luring businesses to SacCounty recognize the overpowering bureaucracy in-grained in the organizations currently contracted todo said luring and do not bother.)
i am not the director of an entity trying to lure business to sac county I am a student. So maybe iwas wrong but that means a lot of people are wrongsince i heard the at large thing from several people.
The Anti-East Sac County School Board throughMelissa Bellcock, chose to make this a campaign is-sue during the school board election.The election should have been about choosing a can-didate that is willing to work with their counterpartsfrom WLVA to build the strongest possible schoolfor the region, Instead, and sadly, it became a politi-cal land grab that did nothing but drive a wedge be-tween the two towns by giving us a majority school board who have already telegraphed their intentionstowards how they would like to “work” with WLVA.(as infrequently as possible)The AEA dealt with this as a discussion point duringthe hearing, and came to the conclusion that by as
soon as the rst election, and maybe by as far out as
the second election that the “2,2,1” method of votingcould be put into place if that is what the interim board, (2 from Sac, 2 from WLVA, one at large) wantand that it was therefore not a block to approvingthe petition to vote on February 2, 2009.
TheSacNews.com is edited byCurtis BloesYou can subscribe to theSacNews.com by sending a check for $35.00 to:TheSacNews.com237 s 9th StreetSac City, Iowa 50583Comments can be left at(712) 830 - 7373Letters to the Editor can be sent email@example.comTheSacNews.com can now be found on the internets athttp://thesacnews.com