Greg R tackles Brenda

One of Brenda’s critics in the online reaction space is “Greg R.” From his comments I’m pretty certain he was a former Duluth principal who is now in JCI’s employ.

His critique of Brenda with my critiques of his critiques.

LDV is continuing the full court press against the LRFP this week with this view from Ms. Anderson coupled with Mr. Glass’ LTTE. Let the chaos continue! Brenda still continues to state the over $400 million cost of the plan even though the citizens pay for only part of it

And just what part of the plan do the Citizens not pay for? The money that grew from trees? This claim assumes savings from efficiencies for instance, one less school one less janitor. Some savings like this would materialize but only a million or two annually not the five million saving promised.

and also they lump in the interest payments when most people assume that is part of the deal when getting a loan/mortgage/bond, etc.

The Federal Government requires truth in lending documents to spell out this expense for home buyers so I guess it must be legitimate. Considering that so many people defaulted on home loans that the entire world’s economy teetered on the abyss last year I don’t think its fair of Greg R to make it sound like Brenda is just nit picking.

She crows about Plan B even though the cost to tax papers is virtually the same and just puts off doing anything major.

The District sandbagged the numbers. More on this when my letter to the DNT is published and I post my email to the Editors justifying this allegation.

She fails to recognize the distribution of students through the area. Schools are staying open and being built were the children are.

Unlike thousands of Midwestern cities that are laid out in grids on flat ground Duluth is a complicated string of pearls. Still, spending half a billion dollars to make our schools symmetrical is a huge cost considering that no one ever said our schools failed to do what they were supposed to – educate children.

Obviously, some children will have to travel. Brenda would make us think the children in central Duluth are being abandoned.

The children in Nettleton and Grant elementary (the poorest part of town) will have a school that doesn’t meet the state’s desegregation standards once the Red Plan combines their schools. That looks like abandonment to me.

Many of us also volunteer and teach in the schools and have had the School board listen to and incorporate our ideas. Not everyone will be happy but the plan optimizes our resources. LDV also fails to recognize the need for optimum facilities in order to properly serve the students with excellent programs. For example, say there is a demand for an advanced chemistry course but it requires 20 students minimum to be enrolled to be cost effective. If there are, 15 student in each of 3 high schools it will not be offered. but if there are 22 or 23 in each of 2 high schools it will.

I do buy this argument. In fact, as a school board member I advocated closing a high school to “optimize” our education. As I’ve always said closing a high school should save money. It shouldn’t cost us half a billion dollars.

Also, a modern facility will provide the space to modern experimental work. The LRFP is an integral part of the District’s capacity to provide quality programming.

Smart boards can be installed in old buildings just like new flat screen televisions can be put in an old houses living room. As for modern experimental work. New labs could have been added to our schools without all the expenses of the Red Plan kicking in.

As far as eminent domain, the District is trying there best to avoid using it. With such a project, it is naive to think that the District would magically be able to create land for the schools.

A little touch of honesty here. The “District is trying there [its] best not to use it.” That sure doesn’t sound like the flat guarantee offered up by the current Board. In fact, if they don’t resort to it they will never be able to build the seven block drive way up to the new western middle school without offering full value to at least one recalcitrant homeowner. If the old board is returned I’m confident that this promise will be dropped in a millisecond.

As for the land issue. This is a city with a huge amount of green space. If IF new buildings were needed there are locations that schools could be placed without having to tear down so many homes.

I still remember the letters from Brenda leading up to the School board vote. She was mainly concerned with keeping Central HS open. It is disappointing to see it close, given its location, but the fiscal, geographic, and student distribution realities are such that it the LRFP is a better option.

So, Brenda’s two year fight is strictly parochial. She wants to save her neighborhood high school. To which I might imply that other people’s parochial interest of making money at the taxpayers expense seems to be the driving consideration.

And despite one hundred years of being able to educate students despite having a lot of students living far away from their schools we now must spend half a billion dollars to plunk schools down in the middle of postage stamp parcels so that kids can walk to school?

Greg

About the author