Gordon Goggin Continues to Misunderstand District

This was posted yesterday on Gordon Goggin’s Facebook page, Save the West Bend Schools:

Minute 15:01 on the video posted on the WBSD website for the video entitled Board work session from 4/12/2010, you will see and hear Dr. Pat advocate for an operating referendum AND see Kris Beaver nod his head in agreement. Check it out for yourself!

I watched the portion of the video in question several times.  Leading up to the 15:01 portion of the video Dr. Herdrich is discussing the 10-11 budget and the fact that it is built upon the assumption that the Board would levy to maximum capacity which would result in an 8.4% increase in the levy.  She then goes on to say that if the board would choose not to use their maximum levy authority that they would need to make further reductions beyond the $2 million that they have already cut.  She also says that if the district under levies and then attempts to go into arbitration with teachers that they would probably lose as the arbitrator would view the district as having additional authority to raise revenue to afford the teacher’s offer.  She then offers a second consequence of under levying.  That consequence would be the inability of the board to advance an operating referendum which the community would support.  She tells the board that it would be a difficult sell as people would see they aren’t levying to the max to begin with.  That’s all a paraphrase but it the essence of the discussion. 

Gordon says that Dr. Herdrich is advocating for a referendum.  Maybe she is, I don’t know, but that is a pretty big leap in logic to conclude from the video segment he referred to in his post.  He is doing the same thing he did earlier with the quote from the Standard and Poor’s credit report.  You will notice when you watch the video the board does not go into a discussion of advancing an operating levy.  They move on to other business.  I also watched the video in full screen and in normal size to see if Kris was nodding his head in approval.  The video quality is poor, but I couldn’t see him nod his head.  He looked more like he was biting his fingernails or something. 

I don’t doubt the board will continue to have discussion about the pro’s and con’s of advancing an operating referendum.  Those discussions do not in and of themselves indicate the board will absolutely go forward with one.  The board needs to have the flexibility and latitude to discuss all options before them, regardless if they may be bad ideas.  We need to back off and let them have these discussions without accusing them of being liars, or not listening to taxpayers, or being lemmings following Dr. Herdrich off a cliff. 

I just don’t see anything in that video that would justify Gordon’s conclusions.  I think he is being unfair and is trying to make the district administration look bad and he is just simply misrepresenting things.  It is dishonest and he needs to be called out on it.

Advertisements

2 responses to this post.

  1. I saw the same video and agree with him. The District has lied multiple times about not having an operating referendum and in my opinion Mr. Goggin has shown that they continue to lie and manipulate the truth. You can continue to deny it but he is right and you are way off target. The Administration isnt being made to look bad. They are being held accountable for things they say and do by a taxpayer. If that bothers you, you should reference commandment #9 and start being supportive and informed!
    Steve

    Reply

    • If you saw Kris nodding his head then you have either better eyes than I do, better resolution on your computer monitor or you are seeing only what you want in there. Secondly, Dr. Herdrich only stated that the effect of underlevying would make it more difficult for passing an operating referendum in the future. It was not a statement announcing they would be proposing one for this within the next year. They certainly haven’t taken the option off the table but I have not seen anything yet that would support Goggin’s contention that they have publicly said they won’t consider it while they have been discussing putting one on the ballot behind closed doors. Peronally, I don’t care if they advance one or not. It will never pass and the board members who support it will get voted off the board in the next election and if the Board can’t see that right now then they deserve to get voted out. I’m not going to get all worked up over it.

      Kris has stated that he won’t support one. That doesn’t mean that the rest of the Board won’t discuss the option of putting one on the ballot. My point is that if Goggin wants to oppose a referendum on the public forum he created, which incidently it appears he has eliminated the ability for others to comment on his posts, he needs to do it more honestly. I have seen nothing so far that would suggest the district is lying about an operating referendum. If you could point out articles or other interviews or board meetings where the Board has a whole, or Dr. Herdrich have specifically said they won’t even consider one within the next year and then turned around in a later article, interview or board meeting and said that they will consider an operating referendum within the next year, then I will concede that they are lying. Like I said in my original post, they should have the right to discuss the option openly, considering its ramfications and possibilities of actually passing. So far, what Gordon has presented doesn’t prove that they have lied.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: