Do you support ISD 2142's decision to raise its operating levy without a public vote?
No. The restructuring was supposed to solve the district's financial woes. Apparently, it's fallen short.
149 votes (82%)
Yes. The school district needs the funds to rebuild its financial cushion and improve education.
32 votes (18%)

Not registered? Click here
E-mail this
20 comments on this item

Curious if voters are voting based on "decision to raise its operating levy" ... or "without a public vote"?

Or neither!

Both. Your two questions are not mutually exclusive.

I'll try again, this time hoping the reader can perceive the difference: "Curious if voters ..."

Oh, never mind. I'll trust Marshall understands my point.

I don't think anybody ever understands your point, but you keep trying. I thought you finally decided to "butt out" of these posts since you felt you were too sarcastic?

Now, now gentlemen. JT knew the answer to his question, and OC is absolutely correct. The folks from the Timberjay readership region are fully disgusted with the mismanagement of the district. They have no chance to pass a levy, at least in the northwesterly portion of the district. I am also amazed and dismayed that Tom Bakk led the fight to pass the bill which allows the district to "steal" our money. Do any of you readers know why the Senator thought this measure was wise?

Building trades union, Rick. Gotta CYA.

Sorry Rick. My partner in life reminded me that the teachers union pushed hard for this referendum, promising cost savings and increased educational offerings. She is right. This is one area my good friend Tom Bakk and I disagree. His motive was to bail out the district, as it's long range plan hasn't delivered the savings as proposed, the kids are doing worse in the classroom, not better in the classroom. But Tom feels he needs to vindicate the unions for their work on the project, hoping the voters won't notice or pay attention. We will just have to see how the voters view this extortion.

Tom knows better than to have done this, but by including other greater Minnesota districts in his proposal, he was assured of passage. Oh could you do this to us?

How come I can sail over heads so easily. One would think that FOX might have better prepared.

No ... I did NOT know the answer to my question and therefore asked. Got inanity in response.

I'd rephrase, but why when the the locals can only respond with what seems ignorance.

But let me once try.

Anybody else want to venture? Is it your pocket book or your feeling that the democratic representative system does not suffice lead you to your vote?

To date the votes seem to indicate that money has little to do with it ... but to hell with having a representative government.

Interesting north country, Mr. Marshall. Very interesting. However ...

Oh, JT. If you read this paper you know the answers.

Not to my question, Rick. Perhaps if the last four words were deleted. Or let me ask MY question along different lines ... if the district in question were healthy, well run and well respected ... then would the vote be the same?

(Note that I am in no way opinionating on this local issue ... I am considering the wording used and inquiring about how these words are being interpreted ... and would they be interpreted the same in other districts ... different situations and different voters)

jt: You are off the bubble. The Rickster is correct. Sadly, you have mental damage that prevents you from reading the pulse of the public. You are sarcastic and a trouble maker. Crawl back into your hole in the Arizona desert and eat some Doritos and whatever your type drink down there.

Now that was a meaningful, helpful, intellligent attempt at an answer ... but totally ignores my query.


Pointless to debate with an imbecile. You live in Arizona, you would do the local residents a favor if you would just butt out of an issue that you readily admit you have no knowledge of. And are so lacking in rational reasoning. I love it though, when I can pull your chain.

Now that was a meaningful, helpful, intelligent attempt at an answer ... but totally ignores my query ... still.

So, next!

jt: Your inquiry doesn't deserve any more comment than has already has been provided. You don't understand the issue, by your own admission. You have a first amendment right to shoot your mouth off on these blogs, just so you can see your words in print. By the way, lady, we also have a second amendment right to own firearms without the government knowing what we own, where we keep it or where we bought it. (You have repetitively denied).

You remind readers of that pesky mosquito that gets into the tent at night and one can't find the thing to swat it.

There. That was a meaningful, helpful, intelligent answer to your inanity.


She's back!


You can always count on Mr. Malaprop to school us on the perpendiculars.

Perhaps the taxpayers can vote to NEVER let Johnson Controls get their hands on another dime of our hard earned tax dollars. The taxpayers were fooled by mis-information from JCI, and stuck with a CLUELESS school board tackling something far above their pay grade and not at all qualified to oversee a project that WASTED millions of dollars. Had that bond vote been held in June it would have failed. There were no experts involved on any level. We should be ashamed that this was allowed. P.T. Barnum was correct- there is a fool born every minute. It seems we had more than our fair share of them.

Too late hard rock. The 2142 screwl board is on board to grant JCI another contract to build 8 more classrooms at the Cherry school. You and I get to pay for it, no vote allowed. The majority on the screwl board says JCI is the best choice, since they already know the building? What do we do? The Tower-Soudan school attendance area member on the board consistently votes against his constituents, who voted 9 to 1 against the original bond, and he won't atone. Only Wall-Glowaski and sometimes Chet Larson show courage and vote with the taxpayers. What to do?

You must be logged in to post a comment. Click here to log in.