Mayor replies to school board’s request for continuance on rezoning
September 13, 2012 at 10:14 am in Hudson Star-Observer
“I believe it is in the best interest of all parties that the issue remain on the agenda for the Common Council meeting scheduled for Monday, September 17, 2012, Burchill said in a letter dated Thursday, Sept. 13. Continue Reading
The school district’s decision to request the continuance and work with the city council to find a “mutually beneficial agreement,” was made in a school board closed session with the participation of the district’s attorney. So, it’s very clear that this is nothing more than positioning by the school district for inevitable litigation with the city. The city council should be extremely wary of being taken in by the superintendent and her attorney. Working in “closed session,” outside the view of the public, is the way Bowen-Eggebraatan likes to do business. In fact, I give the mayor credit for seeing through the district’s offer to “work together” with the council on this. That was nothing more than Bowen-Eggebraatan’s attempt to work out a backroom deal with the city. Perhaps the mayor remembers when the dog track, itself, was concocted in a backroom deal. The mayor, apparently, does not want that to happen here. The mayor is also right that the district had four months to put forth its ideas, so one wonders why the district should be given more time now to put forth some “new ideas.” It’s just more hot air by the superintendent and her posturing for a lawsuit. Good luck, alderpersons.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42 
12
There’s been a lot of emphasis by the school district on the “will of the people” and the “overwhelming” referendum vote of 58% (I’m sorry, but 58% is not overwhelming). The fact is many people regret their “yes” votes. My wife and I regret our “yes” votes. Now that more information has come out, and the chicanery of the school district in pursuing this dog track option by pushing false information on the public to get the referendum passed is clear, we have concluded that we should have voted “no.” (That’s a four-vote swing, and probably brings the margin of victory to 57%, considering the small number of citizens who voted.) I believe there are a lot of regretful “yes” votes out there that would be “no” votes today. If the referendum was taken today, with all the information now available, it would not pass. As a citizen of the City, I’m glad the city council is standing up to the school district and forcing some clarity around this boondoggle.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
28 
13
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
18 
33
The plain fact that Concerned Citizen #1 got a “hidden due to low comment rating” for thier “facts” makes this whole “area voices” a complete joke.
Like or Dislike:
5 
8