November 21, 2009
What's Inside:
'Votes were left on the table'
The St. Joseph School District needed 173 additional “yes” votes to win permanent approval for its 63-cent levy, and a margin that thin allows many plausible explanations for defeat.
But in a margin so thin, a glaring discrepancy stands out: Younger people — parents of school-aged children — stayed home twice as often as older voters on April 7.
Of registered voters ages 18 to 44, turnout was 24 percent. Of voters 45 and older, turnout was 51 percent, according to figures released this week by Buchanan County Clerk Pat Conway.
In context, younger voters simply don’t vote as much as their older counterparts. But the gap was not nearly as large in the 2008 presidential election here, when 65 percent of younger voters and 82 percent of older voters cast ballots.
A leading opponent of the school taxes says the school district never articulated a “truly honest strategic plan” and parents didn’t feel strongly about voting “yes.” Rather than vote against their own children, Ken Reeder suggests the parents stayed home.
“The people who showed up were the ones who were affected monetarily as much as anybody — the elderly, the fixed-income people,” Mr. Reeder said.
Another theory, though impossible to prove, is that Mr. Reeder and campaign strategist Jeff Roe did have a late impact on the polls.
Absentee voters were 52 percent in favor of the levy. (They represented a fairly large sample — 1,176 votes, 91 percent of whom were older voters.) But Mr. Roe’s late campaign mailers seemed to target older voters, and election-day voters followed suit.
Tama Wagner subscribes to both theories.
That’s notable because Ms. Wagner, unlike Mr. Reeder, was not opposed to the tax and bonds for new schools. Ms. Wagner is part of an effort bringing both sides together to address past problems before moving forward.
“I think there were some unresolved issues, and people in that age stayed home instead of voting no — issues in the campaign that they just couldn’t justify,” Ms. Wagner said.
She pointed to three: the removal of the levy’s sunset clause; the school district’s $30 million reserve; and the economy.
“I do think we have to go back out to voters and address those concerns,” Ms. Wagner said.
Despite the thin margin overall, the levy failed in 17 of 27 polling places. The successful April 2004 levy failed in only three of 37 polling places.
Even where it passed heavily, turnout was relatively small.
Consider the voters at Eugene Field Elementary School. The levy passed with a 2-to-1 margin. But it had almost 100 fewer “yes” votes than in 2004, while “no” votes stayed almost even.
“A lot of votes were left on the table,” Ms. Wagner said.
Ms. Wagner discussed a grass-roots, door-to-door, precinct-by-precinct effort to get on people’s doorsteps, ask their opinions and understand their views.
“Everyone needs to be involved in this,” Ms. Wagner said. “Strong schools are the indicator of a strong community, and we need to get all people on board.”
Joe Blumberg can be reached at joeblumberg@npgco.com.
This story has 38 comments. Click here to join in on the discussion.
Story Tools
Hyperlink Legend
E-mail story
Print friendly version
iPod friendly version
Today's Top Headlines
Holiday requests expected to rise
Grain truck concerns arise after wreck
Toy hamster’s popularity says a lot about economy
Stewart sentenced in sodomy case
In the courts, Nov. 21, 2009
JOB SEARCH
RECENTLY DISCUSSED
City wants grant to battle smoking
(74 comments)
Coleman, Intel join forces
(81 comments)
Your letters, Nov. 21, 2009
(14 comments)
It's your call, Nov. 19, 2009
(53 comments)
More Popular Discussions
(74 comments)
Coleman, Intel join forces
(81 comments)
Your letters, Nov. 21, 2009
(14 comments)
It's your call, Nov. 19, 2009
(53 comments)
If a frog only had wings.
I wish Mr Reeder would quit saying how much the elderly would of been effected by this tax, the elderly were going to get a break on this tax and it would not of effected them AT ALL...thats what hurt the votes were the ones who did not do their homework and truly understand what was or was not going to happen. Next time I hope people learn about the issues and outcomes before voting.
noneya: So your saying because people disagreed with you they "did not do their homework and truly understand what was or was not going to happen"
I think people made up their minds to vote the way they wanted with out interference from Reeder or anyone else. I think you are giving Mr. Reeder more credit than he deserves.Just because people voted against it doesn't mean they didn't , as you put it," do their homework and truly understand what was or was not going to happen" people had many reasons for voting as they did, be it yes or no.
Given the previous post on the school bond issue. I believe that it's quite clear a large number of voters where not educated on facts of the issue. Whether that's a fault of their own, Mr. Reeder or Roe, or the St. Joseph School District does not take away from impacts of the final result...a community that has losted current and future jobs along with continuing a downward spiral in comparsion to communities that are willing to invest in their future.
Interesting the very age group where this issue would have had the most impact did not go out and vote at all. In my view, sort of validates what I stated in a previous comment way back towards the beginning of this, all those "electronic network socializing" friends list when it was all said and done most of them either did not vote or were from areas outside of the voting districts. An awful lot of time is being spent on the demographics of this, this is not new information. The bottom line is this failed, and instead of focusing on blame, age group statistics, etc, we as a community have 2 choices, either focus on finding another solution to achieve the similar objectives and one that will have a high confidence level of passing without the need to spend over 80 thousand on guerilla marketing and a campaign(accomplished by engaging the public as a whole), or we can continue to throw stones at each other for years over the one that failed and continue to make comments and publish opinion pieces that in my view disrespect the democratic process. And I have seen that alot lately.
I agree that it will hurt the school district not having the school bond, but it was also their fault for not coming clean with everything. They utilized the same strategy the Democrats used in the presidential election (preying upon the idiots and filling them full of lies, and they just drank the kool-aid and didn't even ask what flavor it was!) but it didn't work for the school district.
It is very sad to see other communities our size, thriving and expanding while St. Joe is hurting and shrinking. The people to blame are the citizens of this town. No one invests in the town or supports the things that go on here. As one example, we have had several baseball teams at Phil Welch and the community all but refuses to support them. If you go and experience the games, it is quite a fun outing and a very good caliber of baseball.
Whether it be the school district or the city government or whatever, they can only do so much until the citizens of St. Joe and the surrounding communities decide to invest in this town and back this town up. Until they decide to back up the things we have here, the entities that be are just peeing on a wild fire. Trying to suppress it enough until it gets the backing of the community it is trying to support.
Yes, the levy issue needed 173 additional people to have gone to the polls to vote "yes" to pass. However, another way to look it is that if only 87 voters who did go to the polls and voted "no" had instead voted "yes" the levy would have passed. That makes the failure to pass even closer than might otherwise appear and makes every voter's vote even more valuable. Each one of us does make a difference.
I know teachers and elderly that voted against. They should spend the money they have before asking for more. I dont need any more tax that is set to last forever, I already have those w/ the government.
I DID do my homework, and I STILL voted no. That has nothing to do with Ken Reeder...I'm smart enough to make up my own mind without a political stragegist telling me how to vote. I voted "NO" for several reasons....mostly because the district was not fully open about the way the district has wasted money....OUR money....and about what they intended to do with the new money, if they got it. I was appalled and offended at how they made the case of needing the levy to pass, or people's jobs would be on the line....but it was very clear that over the past several years, the levy was apparently NOT needed to operate day to day, because that money went into the reserve fund. I applaud them for putting the reserve fund together, but if they've been able to survive and operated without the levy money that was being put in the reserve fund, to threaten to lay people off, or to cut positions if the levy failed was dishonest. As for the bond issue, that was a TOTAL waste of money, especially after the LAST time, they assured us that the money spent to upgrade and update the schools would allow them to be used for another 100 years!! THAT didn't last long, did it!!
Pops, I agree with you. I think another reason that is being overlooked as for why the younger set didn't get out and vote is all of the negative campaigning, mudslinging and mis-information. By the time the vote came around if you were not doing your own investigation and research, one really didn't know what or who to believe. It was just easier for them to stay home and see how it turned out. I don't think Ken Reeder did anything but make people ask some very relavent questions of our school board.
I believe noneya should do his/her own homework before pontificating. I'm not quite sure how he/she arrives at the conclusion the elderly "would not be effected (sic) at all." If he's/she's thinking about the circuit-breaker, he/she doesn't understand it. Most of the elderly pay the same tax as the rest of us; only a small percentage qualify for the circuit-breaker relief.
apple. i find your comment regarding the older votes to be extremely offensive.
apple.. since you didn't comment on this article and it is so unlike you not to have something to say when the article is about the schools I am "assuming" you didn't read it.
http://www.stjoenews.net/news/2009/may/02/district-receive-5m-funds/
Oh, and by the way, unlike your assumption,most of us "elderly" do have exciting lives. We certainly don't sit and rock and only get out when it is time to vote.
heritage , I agree. I also found it to be offensive.
back to the old facts:
if we're losing students, why build new schools?
the town isn't too big for busses.
In atchison county ks beginning in 1948 to today, students ride as far as 80 miles every day to the ONE school in the county (effingham).
why do school district boundaries have to coincide with other arbitrary boundaries?
apple, you just have a bad case of foot in mouth disease. like a child, you claim to be "joking" when called on your insults/slurs. perhaps you could take a moment to examine the content of your posts when you hit the "preview comment" button?
as to "not liking" you, are you serious? that would require actually having met you.
I hope people show up to the public forum Tuesday 5/5 to voice their opinions to the district. Each school will have community representatives there taking notes and all information gathered will be presented to the Board of Education. It's a chance to make sure they hear your opinions because I doubt if they read the blogs unfortunetely. It's at 5:30-7:00 at every public school. Come and speak your mind! They need to hear it!
My dad is a very active senior (he'd be pissed if I can him elderly) he voted no on the tax and always votes absentee. He is a very well educated man and always does his homework.
Opps! Should of proofread!! He's be pissed if I called him elderly! Sure glad he doesn't read these posts.
I quit!
It is not only St Joe that is cutting jobs at schools. Many in Az are cutting because of loss of state revenue. But they are not sitting around crying over spilled milk. One school district is asking its students to each raise $500 so they do not have to cut teachers. Another one is asking the community to get teaching certificates (if they have a BA degree) and volunteer to be subs. It all seems to be getting a good reception.
We keep defending an initiative that failed. If we are committed for change and moving forward, then find a new one that will work and be accepted and stop take shots at a specific group of people. Respect the democratic process.
WW, is there still a meeting at east hills tonight at 5:30?
seems like the location could be moved around to different locations to include the entire voting public. having the meetings at east hills kind of polarizes things a bit, and is demonstrative of one of the flaws in the strategy.
i Do actually read and comprehend the paper. as to your clarion call to drive the exact same issues back down the throats of the voters , it make no sense to continue to try to "slay the slain".
Heritage, yes there is a meeting this evening at 5:30 pm and I have addressed a concern about insuring opportunities exist for inclusion of the entire voting public. That concern hopefully will get some attention. Apple if you believe the original initiative was the right thing, then why not convince the board to take another crack at it. Right now all I have observed since the defeat of this is alot of negative attitude. I voted for this thing, but I also knew there were alot of issues with it, good or bad, they existed and those issues were in my view for the most part ignored. This initiative failed because the arguments for it were not engaging the entire public The article talks about demographics on the voting precincts, nothing more. If the plan was sound, we should not have to look at demographics, there should of been a high confidence level from the very beginning of this that all would have accepted. I have stated this before and will state it again, any initiative that requires a large amount of funding in an attempt to move it forward in my opinion is already facing challenges to get passed. If the public was truly engaged on this issue, then the confidence level would have been there from the very start that this would have flown through without much resistance. And I am sorry, in my view alot of the comments that have been made after the vote have been down right mean and disrespectful of the democratic process. Over 12,000 voted against this, and that includes people who were considered highly educated. Maybe we should take a look at some of their insight.
I disagree. It had everything to do with engaging the public. It failed because the public was not engaged well enough and a large percentage was alieniated. We can spin it any way we want to. The marketing campaign for it could have been presented differently. Instead it sounded like threats instead of solutions. We can argue that all we want to on the approach, but the bottom line is that is how it came across the public. The new school issues should have been addressed long ago. The effort by the coalition is at least something to move things forward and in my view a progressive step. Slam it all you want to, at least there is a group trying to do something about it instead of taking the negative attitude. And I disagree with what is believed will be the outcome. I think another plan will take hold that will shoot for the permenant levy again. If we are continually going to be adiminate the original plan was the right way to go, then in my view why was it not proposed ages ago? The argument has been most other cities and counties in the state do it this way, so why has not St Joseph taken a more aggressive stance with it long ago?
Alot of people who now argue this is the right way ago, have been here for a long time, so what gives? Why was it not argued long ago? We knew the same problems existed.
I would like to say that I moved to this area about 1 year ago, and to this day I am still ashamed to say that I live here. All of you need to wake up and smell the coffee, your children are the future of tommorrow and none of you care. I saw two young kids crossing the street with there parents in the front yard with a "Vote No" sign in there yard. Way to raise your children! Your children will have no future if you pack the classrooms and lose teachers! I am not sure where any of you were born but right now it's looking like most of you were raised in a barn!
Apple, problem with folks like apm, heritage and pops, is, to carry on your airplane analogy, the schools are flying a 707 and refueled a little with the last levy. They need to upgrade to a 787 and our friends are saying we need to move to a Ford DC-3 because it is historic and uses less fuel.
I believe confidence in leadership fell 173 votes short at the ballot box, and money was not the driving issue.
When people 1) see our City Council and School Board on the same page with a plan to lead Saint Joseph for the next few years in all aspects of our City and 2) observe pieces and parts of the Plan put in place over the years, then the voters will gain confidence in the Coucil and School Board Leadership and direction.