Cock’n bull from the Red enders

After several months embarassed silence on the biggest news story in the last decade the Trib finally poked its head out of the closet and reaffirmed its dreadful support for the Red Plan once again reminding its dwindling readership how out of touch the paper is with the community it so often fails to inform.

This offered great cheer to the Red Plan groupies who want to push asside the last roadblocks to the unnecessary Western Middle school project and the $45 million it will cost that could be better used mending a broken staff and violated student programing.

The hogwash hasn’t changed a damn bit and I’ve addressed virtually all of it before. If I had the time and energy I’d be tempted to rake Mimi Larson’s latest rah rah message over the coals. I’ll simply reprint her email here for your amusement and or annoyance.

Critics of the Red Plan should feel free to remind the public that they haven’t enjoyed the District’s rape and pillage. As an antidote to the Larson piece I’d highly recommend the damning personal account of how Amy Zontelli’s child is faring at Woodland Middle School which ran two weeks back in the Reader Weekly.

Now, without further adieu – Heeerrrree’s Mimi:

From: Mimi Larson [mailto:mlarson@duluthmn.com]
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 7:54 AM
To: ‘Mimi Larson’
Subject: MoveForwardDuluth update: Time to speak out (again)!

Friends,

Sunday’s News Tribune had impressive coverage of the District’s Long Range Facilities Plan (LRFP), Plan B and the Red Plan Plus. Proponents of each plan were given an opportunity to highlight the advantages of plan they supported and the paper provided a succinct graph comparing various aspects of plan operation. It was clear that each side felt passionate about their plan; however, in the end the LRFP was clearly the superior option. Fiscally as well as educationally. Just look at the graph if you have any doubts. www.duluthnewstribune.com

While I applaud the DNT for giving the public opposing viewpoints and comparison data to consider I have to admit I am tired of alternative plans. Alternative plans that by comparison cost the taxpayers more and provide less. Look at Plan B. It was a hot topic, until an independent consultant found that it was going to cost taxpayers more and help kids less than the LRFP. Then even some of its staunchest supporters started backing away from it.

Now, another alternative is being proposed: The Red Plan Plus. Supporters of this plan continue to claim it will save the school district money. However, detailed analysis indicates that the Red Plan Plus actually costs $36 million more in construction costs and more than $400,000 per year to operate them than the LRFP does.

More importantly, the Red Plan Plus (36 Million) will dismantle a critical education goal of the district — development of middle school facilities. Nearly every large Minnesota school district has moved to a middle school model. If you want to know why, just ask our teachers, who have been working on this goal for more than a decade. Our 6th-8th grade teachers have spoken out strongly in favor of middle schools.

Let’s be honest. A number of people who are supporting RPP want to preserve opportunities in sports and other extracurricular activities. And yes, three high schools will provide more sports teams. But three high schools also mean 33 percent fewer students in each building, reducing curriculum choices. The trade-off doesn’t make sense — do we really want fewer science and fine arts opportunities so we can preserve one more sports team?

Following the lead of Plan B fans, advocates of the RPP are attacking the plan’s fiscal analysis completed by the school district staff. They claim their plan is less costly. However, it’s an uncertain claim given what they propose. For example, in their plan approximately 7 million dollars will be put into repairing Central. This means that Central will not have the same upgrades or modernization that will happen at Denfeld and Ordean. For Central to be updated to the same standards as these other campuses it would actually cost about $41 million dollars. That’s data that our citizens’ committee reviewed three years ago. So in order to keep a school at Central, RPP supporters seem willing to accept a school that doesn’t meet today’s education standards and will be less modern and a less tech-ready than other school buildings. Is this right or fair to the students?

The RPP would also mean having to re-design all nine elementary schools (even the ones already completed) because 6th graders will return to elementary schools. Some Red Plan Plus supporters say that we don’t need any more classrooms to do this – but how do you add 70+ more students to each school without adding classrooms?

Finally, the biggest waste will come when the District has to spend nearly $18 million cancelling the old bond sales and starting over issuing new bonds. By the way, that’s not just the district staff saying that — the projections are consistent with Plan B’s consultant’s estimates for bond defeasance costs.

The fact that RPP costs more is common sense. If you start building a house, and then halfway through the construction you decide to redesign the bathrooms and the kitchen, the new house is going to cost more. RPP faces the same challenge — it costs more money to do this alternative, and our middle school and high school students will pay the price.

After four years, it is time to recognize the hard work of Duluth’s school board, teachers and citizens who developed and are now implementing the LRFP. It continues to be the plan that offers the best educational opportunities for students, and the best value for taxpayers. Those of us who believe this need to say this to the School Board. One more time. Tuesday night. 6:30 pm in the Board room at the Central Administration Building. It promises to be a long meeting, but it continues to be crucial the Board and District administration hear we support the LRFP.

Mimi

About the author