One of our LDV supporters made it to the meetings where Dr. Dixon was scheduled to get a $5,000 bonus for his successes and a second meeting which immediately followed.
Her report is excellent:
Hello All,
Well I did make it to tonight’s special school board meeting. I was the only one there for the first meeting from the public but I did speak to both Dixon’s bonus and to the upcoming operational levy. I also pointed out that Dixon’s use of the word “Vague” from the last meeting was offensive and a misuse of public trust., Apparently he told the school board to be Vague about what they would use the levy money on during the last meeting. The Board then retired to a closed meeting so I don’t know how they voted, but I can certainly guess that Dixon can go out and celebrate on the taxpayers of Duluth Again.
The meeting that followed started quite late, but Rich & I sat and listened to the information on the upcoming wording for the levy. Dixon immediately stated in this meeting that he never used the word “Vague” about the operational levy. At least two of our members heard it last meeting – In any event, it was quite clear that we have all ends of the spectrum on emotions from the Board on whether the Levy will be a success. Nancy Nilsen, supports a three tier question, using the current amount, and increase to 700 per pupil (double what it is now) and third tier would be 1200.00 (triple) Ann W seems to think that they should go for broke and demand the public support the full 1400 (maximum allowable) because the kids DESERVE a quality education. (too bad they did not think of that before they went for broke and angered the entire city with the No Vote Red Plan.) Tim Grover seems to believe they would be lucky to get the public to continue the current levy but believes they should tack on inflation costs. Big discussions on that issue because apparently a new law allows them to put the current amount on the ballot with wording showing that it will not increase taxes. Many of the School board members believe that any other wording could doom it. They all seemed painfully aware of the issues should the operating levy fail entirely. They talked about the wording for the three tier questions. A person who supports the full 1400.00 would have to check yes to all three options. A person voting down the levy would have to say no to all three questions. Etc., I think it sounds confusing.
Judy Seliga-Punyko finally saw the light when she finally realized that levy or no levy, the District will not be able to bring back the 7th period day. (her pet desire) I am guessing she has made promises to people In her area about getting that back for them. She seemed like a deer in headlights when that realization hit her.
They passed out a sheet that showed the effects of the different amounts of levy dollars throughout the 5 years that it would be in effect, even the full 1400 would put them in the red before the end of the 5 years. Nancy Nilsen pointed out that they could always put through another levy before the 5 years was up when they ran out of money again.
One of the interesting points that Dixon was attempting to make is using a couple charts. One showed 31 school districts in Northern & Central Minnesota. Duluth was considered the 6th or 7th highest income out of 31. Then he showed 275 or so Districts in Minnesota and the per capita funding amounts and Duluth was way down I think somewhere in the 225th. He then talked about what amount Duluth citizens could afford to pay. The reasoning was we can well afford to increase what we pay.
I heard several School Board members talk about how they will market for the levy. I think I heard that they are not allowed to use taxpayer dollars to market or do campaigning for the operational levy. Knowing their history in spending on the news tribune, that should be interesting.
I finally left at 8:30 and they seemed like they were beginning to wrap things up but the last I heard they were going to crunch some numbers and send them out to board members and maybe meet again in a few days to decide on which set of “tiers” to use in the wording.
Funny, it was one of the more interesting meetings for me. It was kind of interesting to see some vulnerability on a few of their faces, like, “hmm, maybe our actions really are going to cause this levy to fail.” – of course some of them are so far removed they don’t appear the least bit concerned (Ann Wasson & Nancy Nilsen)
