Here are real facts and figures about the decision we face at the polls on Tuesday

1) Regardless of the outcome, Wed morning is the beginning of our work as a community to come together and build a true community engineered long range plan for our schools! The bickering must end and we must move ahead for the benefit of St. Joe's Kids.

2) The SJSD is being good stewards with our money. They spend approximately $800 less/child/year than the state average when compared to all school districts and $1,700 less/child/year when compared to school districts the same size. The SJSD CFO & Beau Musser (Benton alumni & CPA who spent hours pouring over the books) agree on these numbers.

3) Our current levy is at the low end of the scale when compared to other school districts in MO. As a result, we are missing out on matching funds from the state of MO, but do not know the exact dollar figure.

4) With regards to the reserve, the passage of this levy buys the SJSD 12 extra months of funding assuming no salary freezes nor deferred maintenance:
a) If the levy passes the reserve will be around the target of 17% set by the SJSD BOE by the end of the 4th fiscal year, starting with the current one.
b) If the levy failes the reserve will be around the target of 17% set by the SJSD BOE by the end of the 3rd fiscal year, starting with the current one.
COF & Musser agree on these numbers.

5) If the SJSD waits the full 5 years for the levy to sunset before returning to the voters, the reserve will be gone and the SJSD will have a negative cash position. In addition, the levy, to sustain the district for the next 5 years, will need to INCREASE by approximately $2.85. CFO & Musser agree on these numbers.

No doubt, we have a tough decision.

My concern is if the levy passes with a sunset we will forever fund our operating levy for our schools with a sunset, which will lead to a long, slow, painful death of a historically solid school district.

Let's stop calling each other names, making degrading remarks and vote our conscience. Then, let's come together, engage our community and decide how we are going support our schools in the long term so we can give our best to St. Joe's Kids - they deserve it!

mweyugfyt

sorry about that, these darn kats won't stay in bed with me and walked on the keyboard.
I noticed the KQ2 poll as well, I'm sure it is accurate and the rest of the NO in Nov group will be successful for the good of our schools and community.

I will vote my conscience and that will be NO because of of 3 reasons
1.Levy does nothing for the children in the long run except put the district in financial ruins before it is over and I do not personally want to go through this again in a couple of years.So again this levy even if passed seems as if it will still take programs away from the children.
2.SJSD/SJSB inabllity to engage the community and work with the community as a whole to earn some trust back and to work with the entire community to put a levy together that the public will support.
3.Not the right time for several reasons and some of those for me are, New board member elections in April that could very well have a hugh impact on the district,Economy and the unemployment rate is higher then 9% in St joseph because of the fact people have unemployement benefits have ran out and they have not still found employment.These people are not tracked toward the unemployement % any longer after their benefits run our so our true rate is probably around 10.5% or higher.
We need to wait till next year to when the economy shows signs of recovery in the job sector.
4.And a major one for me TRUST in the SJSD/SJSB and the TF(OCOFOD)group.
NO On Tuesday

I'm voting "Yes". I realize the 5-year sunset may not fit well with some of you, because you feel that doesn't address the long-term issues. I agree, but this levy is the best and last. It puts the funding BACK on the table, at least for 5 years. If the district can engage with the community, be honest and transparent in how it conducts business, in 5 years, we can make this permanent.

Also, for the NP staff....this is NOT raising taxes!! I can't imagine why you'd write this article in such a way!! IT IS NOT RAISING TAXES!!! It is merely restoring a tax that we've been paying already!!

I agree with Mr. Hickman. However, this is an easy decision for me. I am a solid YES vote. It is the right thing to do — for all the compelling reasons cited by Mr. Hickman, but also because in good conscious it is important to me to support public education in my community.

I think anyone reading these posts heard from enough from myself and those above enough about the issue, I see no point telling anyone how I will vote since it has no bearing on how anyone else plans to vote. Those that agree with John and mm will simply vote the way they vote. The following is only for those still undecided.

Just some last facts -

We fund our schools less than most districts in the state, our economy, problems, challenges in this community are not unlike those which fund their schools.

The .63 levy only restores what we had for the past five years.

Our schools are the third largest employeer in the community, making them weaker will affect everyone in this community.

Opposition you have been recieving in the mail is from a group who's national agenda is to kill public schools. They want to take over your schools.

Those oppose say we can survive until a long term plan is put together.

Those for the levy say restore funding with a five year sunset so the community can hold the district accountable so a better long range plan can be put together.

Finally, the district is not perfect, and they make mistakes, however every independant audit done on their books show them doing a great job.

You may be mad at the school closing and what happend after the levy failed. Please keep in mind, if you have a bad day, don't kick the dog.

Please vote yes, St. Joe if you don't stand up for your own, who will.

Being CONSCIOUS is generally a precursor to voting (perhaps that's not enough qualification for voting, but that's another discussion), but one's CONSCIENCE is what helps guide in our decision about each issue.

Hello, Mr. Editor?

well, so much for the advanced news-press notice last week
that read (in keeping with the tradition, the news-press has stopped publishing comments concerning the school levy in advance of tuesdays election) guess it did not mean that the news-press had to stop their campaining

No on Tuesday or we will continue to get the status quo and I am not looking for the status quo any longer I want change and the right direction for our school,Children,and Teachers.For education and the up keep of the schools and to retain the teacher this levy is not going to accomplishe any of this.
A yes vote gives none of that to any of them in my opinion.And this is what my concouis tells me to do the right thing not half right.These are my opinion now I am open for the TF member attacks.

the heck with your conscience, vote with your BRAIN. i agree with mr. hickman completely about the need to stop the insanity. JAH leaves out, however, the fact that beau musser completely opposed the Task Force and spoke against the proposed levy at three BOE meetings, based on his findings.

the community does need to come together and we don't need some PR company hired and financed by the Task Force to tell us how to do it.

thank goodness today is the last of this. i hope the results are definitive and that they represent the community as a whole. get out and vote.........

Heritage if this does not pass this will not be the end of it we will see the true colors and sides of thew TF members Wednesday morning.For myself If it does pass I will go one and wait till the next time before the levy expires to remind them this is what they wanted and to live with it as well I will not support the TF in any long range planning because how could you vote for a bond issue when they will come back and ask for more operating money before the levy would expire in 5 years this is just goingto be a vicious cycle if this levy passes but it shows signs of failing.Poll still alwful high with people saying no

Steve Booher here... Pops, the reason we refer to this issue as a tax increase is because that's what it is. Because the levee failed in April, your taxes will decrease next year. Passage of the levee tomorrow reverses that decrease, but not in time to make up for a loss in funding. It is not a continuation of an existing tax, no matter how many exclamation points or capital letters you use.
Phl314, sorry about the mistake. I will correct it online.
Bdog, this column does not advocate either for or against the levy increase. Thus, is doesn't violate our policy.
You guys have a good day.

Mr. Booher, with all due respect, calling this a "tax increase" is not only inaccurate....it gives the public the wrong idea. It makes SOME folks worry about NEW taxes. It seems to me it would have been MUCH more responsible for the NP to have reported this as a "reinstated tax"....not a "tax increase". The wording could incite negative results at the poll....that's my point.

I get so tired of hearing " IT IS NOT RAISING TAXES!!! It is merely restoring a tax that we've been paying already!!" I have news for you it is raising taxes and it is a new tax. If you got your tax bill today it would be less money than last years bill, no ifs ands or buts. In my opinion that makes it a new tax.

SteveB, you corrected one mistake, but now the LEVEE failed? I don't remember any flooding this year. The LEVY is another matter.

I can see where someone's education fell short.

No biggie, Steve... this kind of stuff happens occasionally to all of us who write on a regular basis.

I just found it humorous that there were errors in vocabulary in an article on the issue of educational funding. Well, that, and the fact that you mentioned voters and "conscious" in the same sentence. Even though it was clear what you meant, it was just too good to pass up.

Sorry if I caused any embarrassment!

Perhaps I am mistaken, but I thought a News-Press story prior to the April election said six administrators -- not just two -- were in the $100,000-plus category: Dr. Smith, Mrs. Pullen, Mrs. Patterson, Mr Hartigan, Mr. Huff and Mr. Flowers. Did some take a salary cut after the April failure, or is my memory slipping?

Falcon I believe you are correct all of these administrators are above 100,000 a year and that is a fact not a opinion or a assumption.And some of these are assistant for a assistent positions which they could do without and save the money for the schools,children,and teachers.
I will probably get attacked for my next comment but I can live with it and it does have to do with wasting our money. I think I remember a job being created for Mrs Flowers and buying NEW furniture instead of using what the district had in office furniture from the 2 school closings.Makes one wonder how much of these types of things do go on and actually how much waste there acually is.

Rabble, it's NOT a new tax. We've been paying it for a long time...and should again. It would ONLY be a "new tax" if the amount were increased, or if it were an ADDITIONAL levy, above and beyond the 63 cent levy....such as the bond issue. Neither is the case....
It would be more correct to call it a "reinstated tax".

Look people like Mr Booher was right with what he put in his post it is actually a new tax the levy failed in April and the tax went away.So it will be a new tax anyway you look at it because your tax statement you have coming will not have it on there since it did not pass in April.It is a new tax any way you look at it.Sure we paid it for 5 years but we will not this year.Remember Mr Conway said we would see a 12% reduction in our taxes this year.

My opinion really isn't that important, but since my name keeps getting mentioned on this New Press Website, I thought I would defend myself. First off, I am a CPA and a few months ago, I spent many hours reviewing the SJSD’s audited financial statements and budget projections. This is what I found:
• The SJSD spends significantly less per student, per year, than other school districts
• 63 Cents is not nearly enough to properly fund our schools in the long term
• Regardless of the outcome of this current election, the SJSD will begin deficit spending for the foreseeable future and will continue doing so until an adequate operating levy is passed by citizens of this community

I was, and still am, absolutely opposed to putting sunset clauses on the operating revenue of the school district. I was very critical of the task force and the School Board for choosing to include the sunset clause on this ballot initiative, however, there is absolutely no way I will align myself with those people who are opposing this ballot initiative. I will vote yes tomorrow, but I will continue to push for permanent funding for our schools. As a member of the school district’s newly formed “Finance Citizens Advisory Committee,” I will continue to ask difficult questions of the Administration. I will push for long-term solutions to our finance troubles and challenge those who make short term political decisions.

This is a very good editorial. My vote is based on my rationale and an independent decision, and just because I am voting No, it does by no means support the CAFT. The OCOFOD also does not speak for me. The messages from both groups are sending out in my view do not address any real concerns on any of the district issues. CAFT trashes the administration, OCOFOD uses very vague vocabulary. If this fails, the opportunity exists to bring it back with the proper arguement to meet the needs of improvement, progression,and future state. If that opportunity is not taken, then no one in this communityh wins. Sunset clause holds back and does not address the real issues. As a citizen of this community I am not going to wait another five years for this. My vote is No, argue it correctly or we do not need it.

To add when I voted yes/yes back in Apr, one core reason was to eliminate the sunset clause. I am not voting yes to re-instate it because the initiative in Apr failed. This does not address the same things the Apr campaign did.

beau_musser,
I agree with you, basically, but I do have a couple of things I'd like to ask, since you're a CPA...and I'm not.

You mention the district will start deficit spending in the foreseeable future. Is that because of the loss of the April levy issue? You say 63 cents is not enough. While I MAY agree with you sometime in the future, is it not true that the district has operated without having to use the previous 63 cent levy, and were NOT operating in a deficit mode? After all, according to the district's own records, much of the previous levy was used to create the current reserve fund. That means, to laymen such as myself, they had enough surplus coming in with the previous levy, they could put it away, and still had operating funds.
What do you see changing so drastically in the economy that would make the district operate in a deficit, even with a 63 cent levy in place?
Personally, I don't view the levy as a monetary issue as much as I see it as a trust issue. That's just me, though...

Pops - The way our School District is funded is extremely complicated, but I will try to cover a few things because it is very important to understand how we got where we are today:
1. The Sunset clause was originally put on the ballot approx 5 years ago because the SJSD thought they would receive additional money from the new State Funding Formula (and thus they could do without the 63 cent temporary funding)
2. Over the course of the past 5 years, the SJSD was able to grow their reserves, however, they needed to. A school district that is subject to such volatile operating revenues needs to have hefty reserves in case they lose funding (which is currently the case).
3. Once the State Funding Formula changed, the SJSD actually received much less than they were anticipating, and we are now at a point where are revenues are flat (actually declining), while our expenses keep rising due to teacher raises and rising costs of health insurance.

Fortunately, we have reserves in place help us get through the next five years. But don't be fooled.. we must significantly increase our operating levy in order to remain solvent. The only other option is to start firing teachers, which would be disastrous.

I understand that people are skeptical of government. But I have spent a lot of time reviewing our School District's financials, and I can tell you that they are doing a fine job.

Ok if they were not operating in a deficit then why were schools closed would be one of the first question that come to mind.Which in return caused all of the redistricting.Seems to me there are really to many unanswered questions and the board has not been willing to answer these.My issues are what are they keeping from us cause it seems as to many questions continue to come to mind.If this is indeed almost all of the reserve was biult off of the levy then it made no sence to close the schools.This whole mess it no where near being resolved and the questions are no where near being answered from the board and Mrs Smith.I think if this is true about the reserve then they closed the school to push their vision on biulding school and felt they could push the community into doing it as soon as we saw the mess we had by closing these schools.They need to be open and honest and fund the school with the communitys entire support or WE say NO till they do.What the heck do they not want us to know?

Mr Musser,
I have no problem with what you are saying and I have no reason to question you.But the fact remains why are they willing to settle for less and not engage the community that does not trust them and work with the community for what funding is right for our schools,children and teachers?I also think this election is going to come down to a trust issue and people do not trust these people.I do not trust them it seems as if they talk out of both sides of their mouths and you do not know what to believe.I see no reason to continue down this road with the knowledge that they will continue to come back to us and ask for more and more.Do it right the first time or not at all but they have to get off their butts and earn the communitys trust.I do respect your position and your honesty.

mm1967 - Based on my conversations with SJSD, the schools were closed in order to save money going forward (it is cheaper to run 16 elementary schools instead of 18). Am I happy they closed my elementary school (Webster)? No. Not at all. But what were they supposed to do? Voters just reduced their annual revenue by $6,000,000, and they were simply looking for ways to save money (when approx. 75% of your expenses are due to salaries and benefits, you don't have many options. They chose to close schools instead if firing teachers).

MM1967 - You said "Do it right the first time or not at all." I wish it was that easy. Doing it right would mean an increase of approximately $2.50 right now. In april, voters just rejected 63 cents that wasn't even a tax increase.

This debate is not over. Lets all work together to get it right over the next 5 years. It is going to take that long.

Mr Musser
I feel for you and your children that got moved from this school closure.They really probably should have just addressed the levy in April and it would have passed since if failed by a total of only 172 votes.But hind sight is 20 20.Also if they were left open and brought the levy back in November to the community with the sunset it would have passed with flying colors even though some of us do not believe this is the right way to fund our schools. I do not support any group just a citizen that has never seen our schools in this kinda mess.Not even through all of my years in school.I truely believe the school closings and redistricting is going to be what makes this levy fail if indeed it does.People have not healed or calmed down about this issue as of yet.

I would vote for an even dollar levy, but $2.50?? Nope...not in a million years. In the current economical situation, there's no WAY I'd vote for that. Everything is going up....except people's paychecks. I don't care if the district becomes insolvent....such an increase would NEVER happen.

thank you to beau musser for posting here.

I agree with Sarah - Thank you Beau for posting some great information.

i also oppose the axiom strategy. i defend any american's right to choose for themselves, even if i find it abhorrent.

i vote no, to prevent this short sighted and short term solution to a real need for fully funding our schools. we can, and should do better.

pops November 2, 2009 at 11:42 a.m.
" I don't care if the district becomes insolvent....such an increase would NEVER happen."

pops - before you make a knee jerk reaction to an amount, I would propose you join the community (us) in learning what issues currently face our district and provide your input & ideas on how they can be resolved so our kids get a good education. Then, if your answer is still no, so be it.

Once this levy is over tomorrow night, let's all PLEASE get out of the mode of knee jerk reactions to information and be willing to invest the time to really understand, at a deep level, what is going on with our schools. This isn't a plea to support or oppose the SJSD BOE or Admin it is a plea to come together as a community and do what's best for St. Joe's Kids!

johnahickman,
Mine is not a knee-jerk reaction. Plain and simple, I just can't afford such a levy rate, and I'm not alone. Many, if not MOST of the residents in St. Joe would not be able to afford it either. Wishing to fully fund the district is one thing. Being able to afford it is a different story. I think I could afford an even $1 levy, but that's about the most I could afford to do. More than that would be devastating to my personal budget.

My hope is that the district comes back to the voters in about 3 years and asks for a $1.00 increase (They will also need to make this 63 cents permanent). And then they will probably need to come back in 6 years time and ask for another $1.00.

Lets be sure to remember that in 3 years time, it will be a total of 8 or 9 years before the sjsd actually asked for a tax increase from the voters.

For the first time I beleive we had good quality information posted here, still, those oppose such as mm cannot get over personal feelings dispite logic that is presented in front of him. Logic which explains the reserves, explains the school closings, explains the complication of school funding, logic which explians why .63 levy is the right call right now.

You lose a $50,000 a year job, you have $10,000 in savings, you have been out of work since April, you are finally offered a job at $40,000 - you make cuts in your expense to make that amount work. Don't you have to take that instead of waiting for that $50,000 offer to come which could be a year, two or maybe even five years away.

It just makes sense, vote YES for the levy - thank you -

Sence I will vote No because that is my beliefs as your right to vote yes is your beliefs.
I believe what Mr Musser has had to say and respect that.But there are to many unanswered questions that I have not heard the answers to from the district.
I like your job senerio sence but I bet you would find there is people who had those jobs and just maybe have not even been able to find the lower paying job which I am sure people would love to have.But the sign of the times right now is jobs are slim pickings for people. Sence My personLl feelings I believed are shared by quite a few in the commuunity you will see tommorow.

beau., you know my fear is, and has been, that the voters who may switch to support the levy With the sunset will be utterly infuriated to learn that the district has known all along that they simply cannot survive on .63 ..... and that the voter's reaction will be of betrayal. if this possibility had been elucidated as part of the much touted "compromise" of adding the sunset, perhaps this might be something which could be remedied. as it is voters who swallow hard and vote for this levy with a sunset will be nearly impossible to re-convert when the district reveals that they MUST have this additional funding, and far before the expiration of the five year "promise". they will see it as dirty tricks, a "bait and switch" scheme which i fear more than ever will backfire on the future of education for decades to come.

whatever happens, this "us against them" mentality which seems to be overtaking not only our own small community, but the entire country, cannot continue.

sense November 2, 2009 at 2:31 p.m. "those oppose such as mm cannot get over personal feelings"

sense - you and I both know this isn't exactly an accurate statement about mm. If you perceive it to be accurate, you must not be fully reading his posts.

mm's main concern focuses on trust and a belief that he (and other similarly situated) has been ignored, inspite of being engaged with his children and their education in the schools.

My perception is that many parents from a variety of areas of town have similar perceptions - especially after the school closings & redistricting.

The point here, is it is time to stop the finger pointing/name calling/marginalizing comments and start listening to each other and accepting that we have a variety of perspectives on our present situation. We must start working together and to do that we must first stop speaking poorly of each other - and we MUST do this for the good of St. Joe's Kids!

Heritage I agree with you but he us against them has to start on their part with community engagement of their own not the TF(OCOFOD).Which by adding 2 new board members by the public that are willing to involve the community and communicate with the public and hold the admin more accountable for their actions will change the us against them mentality. The public will be very picky when it comes to replacing these 2 board members in April.And by getting people that are willing to involve the community will make it hard on the remaining members to do the same and then we can move forward in my opinion.Our community are they type of people you crap on us and tell us what to do and we will not stand for it and when you come up for re-election you will be gone.The boards good ol boy club is coming to a end.
And you are correct with your bait and switch and dirty tricks comment and this is how it will be seen if they come back to us before 5 years when the levy would expire.And what do you think the voters will say (NO)

John H
I wonder when does this working together with the district start some of are ready to move forward but not with the TF involved.Our elected officals and administration should be the ones doing this.It like they are hiding behind this group and are afraid to engage the community.It is going to be hard people are going to be very skeptical and sinical at first but they should know this going in.This has to involve people from all over our community and from all walks of life to be sucessful.Everybodys opinion matters.This message must be gotten out and everybody must come to the table.This needs to happen either way if the levy passes or fails and when it does the TF must step aside and the SJSD/SJSB must take over the lead.The people who run the TF are nt trusted as well.Some of are willing and ready is the SJSD?Who's going to convinve them of this?Who's going to tell the TF to take a back seat?We do not need people from the outside telling us what to do we are grown adults here we should be able to do what right working with each other.We have children to and we want the best for them as well as our community's children.And John you are correct we need to quite degrading each other this does nothing but further divide our community and makes the schools and children suffer more.

Sorry John but I don't agree with your description of mm - he champions any point of view which will lead to the defeat of the district. I have read mm posts for a long time and they all say the same thing. His own admission he said he had a personal problem with Dr. Smith. He won't even call her by her professional name. He has blamed the schools over the H1N1 believing they are not taking proper steps. His is nothing more than a parrat repeating any opposing viewpoints against the district.

As well as you have been degrading for a long time and it is people like you and their unwillingness to work with the entire community and people like you will keep this community divided for some time to come.It people like you the resaon this levy failed in the first place and probably will fail again tommorow as well.
When people say they are willing to work with everybody from all areas of the community and even the board and admin to do whats right for the children,teachers,and school and you come back with comments like you have it is discusting.Its people like you that will keep the district down.Apple I hope you are proud of your self and you for sure showed who you are by the way.Your true colors are showing.Ypu know some people can let by gones be just that and forgive and forget but there are people like you that will not let anyone forget and want to keep the rest of the community down while you look after your own little part of the community and we know where that is.Come out and live in the real world applesence.John see these are the type of people who will keep this community divided.

mm - you are not the community, just because I disagree with you does not mean I disagree with the community. Did I say anything in my last posts not true?

Yes plenty since you do not know me or who I am or what I do or anything.You fail to see past your own nose.Do you disagree wit hthe people who feel the same as I do and do not post here?Cause if you do there are pelnty you disagree with.People do not trust the school district admin and board.Are you blind to that fact?

mm1967,
Apple hasn't even commented in this thread. Why bring apple into the discussion?

I'd like to know something....just for the record. Do you oppose ANY levy for the district? Do you support a permanent levy (no sunset clause)? If so, what amount do you think it necessary and appropriate?

No pops I do not oppose any levy for the schools.Pops I would support a levy without a sunset I voted YES/YES the last time in April.And for a amount that will fund our schools for our children and teachers.Nothing starts without communications.And pops sence 9 times out of 10 is apple think about it read the post see the common things such as spelling and the main one her attacking me all of the time is a dead give away to me.I could be mistaken but my gut tells me other.And you have had to see others think the same in some of their post.

mm - posts "I would support a levy without a sunset I voted YES/TES the last time in April and for a amount that wil fund our schools for our children.

The amount last April for the levy was .63 the same as this levy, if you felt it is enough then why do you keep saying its not enough -

It did not have the sunset on it either sence.We were supporter but now we are not and will not.We also if you would see voted for you a school to the NE if you have not seen we voted yes for this as well.
And then 63 cents none of knew all of the info that has came to light over the last 6 months now did we.

The past few months I have engaged individuals on these posts regarding the levy. What is clear is the difficulty not to take arguments and opinions personal. I hope no matter the outcome if the community is to work together we do so understanding the East side and south side both have equal responsiblity and stakes in our education. We all put away our egos and attitude and stop trying to win arguments but rather disolve them.

I understnad I am quilty of this more than others. I apologize for going to far to many times to get my point across. I admire those I debate with who have as much passion of their points of view as well. I hope no matter the outcome those of ACE will continue to push what they beleive is right as those who disagree with them do as well.

To Hearitage, John, Dill thank you for thoughtful posts and arguments. MM - hope you find peace in this world and I hope whatever outcome may come it benefits your kids.

Thank you to the NP for taking heat from my posts and allowing the flow of opinions.

Tomorrow vote what you beleive is best for our community, nothing else, no other arguments matter. I apologize for to many posts.

I am not a woman and I do have kids in school - I am not affiliated with the TF or the school district, Dr. Smith would have no idea who I was if she saw me. I have friends that work in the schools and thats about it. Im just a normal taxpayer like most of you nothing else.

I am apple, sense and now I am done.

Thank you, and vote tommrrow -

apple/sence thank you and I wish you well and I truely mean that.You also have made me see a few things in myself I have not seen in years thankyou.Have a good evening apple/sence I truely mean this.

Sense, thank you for your comments. I still believe that the school district and board had better get involved in the community. I will hope that the firm they have hired for their long range plan will help them understand that. However, I still say that if this loses, it is also somewhat on the backs of the business community for the wages they pay. The costs of schools will continue to rise. We can not do things as we did them just 10 years ago. We must be open to alternative ideas. But, to fund these new things, the schools will continue to need money. This is also a city problem. We don't pay well, so we are reluctant to support a major revenue issue. Relating to private schools... I am sorry but I just do not think that, when they need more money, they will ask the people for their opinion and support like the public schools do. They will just raise their prices. Then, if you can't afford it, you can always go to the public school.

John, I am curious about one thing. How many years have you been in this community, anyway? I appreciate your stand on this issue, but in a community like St. Joseph, sometimes you just kind of just have to ask for what you think the community can/will deliver. When you ask for public support of any issue, you can indeed be very right, but the trick is to convince the voter why they should vote your way, sometimes against their own financial interest. This is the problem that the school district is facing now.

Does anyone know how I can view a "sample ballot" for tomorrows vote?

dilly - if you are asking me, my family has been in the SJSD since my great grandfather moved our family here in 1919. I grew up in Helena & attended the Savannah School District. I have lived in Helena, St. Joseph, Kansas City, Columbia, MO and Northern Virgina.

dilly - while I understand your perspective about having achievable goals, I haven't known anyone who rises to low expectations. That's part of our problem, we are stuck in the black abyss of mediocrity. I will continue to have high expectations of our community and for our leaders - it is just the way I am wired - it is the way I was raised and see no reason to change that part of my being.

Buchanan County web site you should fine the sample ballot.

It is really refreshing to see sense/apple and mm begin to repair their relationship. We will all need to follow their lead in the coming weeks for the good of St. Joe's Kids.

Thank you mm1967

You are welcome

mm1967,
I understand your feelings, and respect your opinion. However, you say you would vote for a levy without a sunset clause, basically making it permanent. Then, in almost the same breath, you indicate you don't trust the district leadership, and that things have only recently come out that convince you the 63 cent levy isn't enough.

That's EXACTY why I will ONLY vote for a sunset clause levy. I don't trust the district to be honest and transparent. I think there are WAY too many hidden pitfalls just under the surface that we voters can't see. I agree that 63 cents isn't enough, but that's what they've asked for. I'd have voted "Yes" even if it were an even dollar. Some have suggested more, but I have doubts anything more than a dollar would pass in this town. At the present time, with the dismal state of distrust between the community and the district, and with the district leadership (executives and school board) continuing their lack of full disclosure and lack of meaningful communitcation, I will NOT give them a blank check, which is basically what a permanent levy would be. The sunset clause, in my opinion, is the only way to keep the district accountable to the community.

I hope those of you on the school board, and in the higher offices, are reading these posts.

WE DON'T TRUST YOU....AND YOU'VE DONE LITTLE OR NOTHING TO EARN THAT TRUST IN RECENT MONTHS!!

There....that's how I feel.

Happy voting, my friends!!

Apple, I'm very glad you had the good "sense" to come back!! You were missed!!

Pops
A new levy at this point would not be now would it since we are voting today.I will stand firm and will vote no after I take the kids to school.Call my vote vindictive or look at it however you like but I will not vote for this levy.I do not trust the current admin or board.But I would give a permant levy for the schools.And if it does not pass which I dont not think it will they will have to work with us and be more transparent.No matter what happens today the SJSD/SJSB nneds to engage the community and work with the community for a long term plan not and I stress not the TF(OCOFOD)I will not support these people and their tactics they could care a less about the entire community.The board and the admin shopuld be smart enough to get off their butts and work with the community and come to middle ground and devlop a long term plan the public will support for the long term financial needs and the long term of the school for biulding and such.Not Mrs Smith flawed vision of biulding large school to combine 2 schools into one.

mm1967,
If you don't trust them, why would you be willing to give them an endless levy?

dilly, one of st joseph's biggest hurdles is the " you cannot do it that way here" mentality. reach for the clouds, and you can fly!!!!!

i am voting no, without malice, and with a firm conviction that it is the best decision for a long term solution. thanks to everyone who cares enough to cast a vote, no matter which choice you make.

For my children pops for my children since I have one that will be there for 12 more years.Think about it our children will still be in school and the current boardwill be gone and I am betting Mr Smith days are numbered.And now if this levys fails it will not make it back to a ballot before new board members are elected and the public will be very selective on who they vote to sit on the board and the new member will make it hard on the current members not to engage the community and work with the community.And this will help with the trust issue I believe.

Hope you're right, mm.....hope you're right. For now, I understand you'll be voting "no"....I'll be voting "yes".

Peace be with you!!!

$2,500 a week plus $200.00 a week car allowance is WAY out of line for the work requirement !!

Steve_O, I assume you mean the superintendent. And, if you do, I agree with you, wholeheartedly. I wonder if she needs a chauffeur.