Homemade sign opposing $8.2 million bond in USD 473
A homemade sign along K-15 on a farm northwest of Chapman is perhaps the only “no” sign in USD 473 to oppose the $8.2 million bond election to be held on April 7:
“Chapman ZIP 67431, NOT 90210, VOTE NO TO 8.2 Million Bond”
There is an emotional response in Chapman to vote “yes” and build three new schools, which will cost a staggering $75 million, even though there has been little transparency in the process. Is emotion the best way to make a decision?
Yesterday in Dickinson County several citizens from USD 473 talked to the Meadowlark and described how the public in Chapman was never allowed to participate in the process of planning their new schools, and discuss openly, and without fear of retribution, many questions:
Is an emotional response the best way to spend $75 million for new Chapman schools? Should not a well thought out plan embrace community suggestions and feedback? Should not a well thought out plan consider taxpayers and their ability to pay now, and how the economy may affect the ability of many to pay higher taxes?
Is Chapman being fair to the rest of Kansas and the United States by playing $8.2 million of the total and passing the rest to the State of Kansas (about $5.4 million) and FEMA (about $41.1 million)? Is “free” money really “free”? What lesson is this teaching our children to take advantage of “free” money, and the charity of others, when much about the plan is not needed?
North side of homemade sign opposing $8.2 million bond in USD 473
Does Chapman need the new much larger schools? If we build it, will they come? Doesn’t the huge new size offset the energy efficiencies, and utilities actually may be much more with the new schools? Will a tax increase be needed to pay the higher utilities? Will USD 473 need to hire additional janitors to deal with the larger space? Can we afford the new long-term costs for these larger buildings?
Does Chapman need to split middle and elementary schools now so they will need separate libraries, separate kitchens, separate nurses? How does Chapman benefit from a fourth gym — or is that the only reason to split the middle and elementary schools? Is a fourth gym more important than the cost of duplicating many facilities in the elementary and middle schools? Does Chapman need four gyms each with seating of 600 or more?
How will moving the elementary school from near downtown to the edge of town affect the downtown area? Who benefits from moving the school to the edge of town?
What is the breakdown of the taxes paid for by home owners, businesses, farmers with this new bond?
Why is the school district’s new office called an “Education Center” to hide its true purpose?
There are many more questions, but the public was never given the opportunity to see and compare alternatives and costs in public forums. Why?
This letter from LaVerne Myers, a former member of the USD 473 Board of Education, recently published in the Salina Journal and the Abilene Reflector-Chronicle, takes the USD 473 administration and current board to task for depriving the public an opportunity to participate in this rebuilding process. Myers was required to pay $58 to have this editorial published in the Chapman newspaper:
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Should you vote YES or NO for the USD 473 Bond Issue? I have not talked to one person that is against a bond to rebuild Chapman school buildings and support the long term future of educating the children of the USD 478 School District. What they are against is building a 75 Million dollar school and the district living outside their means of operating this school.
It surprises me that the people that are for the bond think that all of the Chapman school problems will be solved when the bond is passed and the schools are rebuilt. Before we vote on a bond the school administration and the Board of Education should have provided the patrons of the district with an evaluation of the cost of the operation, realistic number of future students, and what cuts in the budget will most like have to be made in order to keep a viable school district in the future.
There are a lot of home owners that are experiencing the economic dilemma of owning a home that they can not afford to pay the expenses of operation and property taxes on. The Chapman school was built on the principle of a county wide school with rural kids attending from as far away as 40 miles. That is why the USD 473 Tax bas is over 80% rural and 20% in the towns of Chapman and Enterprise. The Chapman administration and Board of Education decision to starting bringing students out of their rural schools into Chapman only resulted in losing students and revenue to other schools. They even lost some of their rural tax base that was transferred out of the Chapman district. By following the inefficient rebuilding plan outline in the current bond issue they will only accelerate the closing of more rural schools, loss of students, loss of revenue, and even large blocks of their rural tax base that will go to other school districts that are closer, have kept their mill levy down and are more efficiently ran.
It is time that we hold the USD 473 Administration and Board of Education accountable for their past actions and get answers on what the school needs in their rebuilding process. We still have plenty of time to defeat this bond and vote on another one with the help of FEMA that would build the kind of schools that Chapman needs for the future.
LaVerne Myers
Former member of USD 473 Board of Education
A document, “Our Trust is gone,” is currently being circulated in parts of Dickinson County with many more details. Since the details in that document cannot be independently verified, that document will not be published here. That open letter is signed by:
Current and former USD 473 employees and DCCHS patrons
(Names are not signed to protect our jobs and our families from Mr. Frieze)
Related:
- Tornado ravaged Chapman to spend as much as $90,000 per student to rebuild schools?, Kansas Meadowlark, March 25, 2009.
Tags: Chapman Kansas, FEMA, schools, Tornado, USD 473
I have personally read the document “Our Trust is Gone” and it is nothing but full of hatred and personal rage against one man. I can understand that some people dislike others but to put forth such a document under the guise that it is telling the “facts” is simply wrong and not reflective of good morals and values. The “fact” that not one name is on this document should put up red flags to all who have the misfortune to read it.
I too have personally read the document “Our Trust is Gone”. I am someone who has heard, first hand from employees, the things that have happened to them after they stood up to Tony Frieze. It is not a pretty picture. It is no wonder they did not want their names signed, as they would be chastised and probably replaced. For these individuals who put their experiences in this document, I commend them. They put their jobs on the line for something they believed in: their community, their schools and all of the students. These individuals want schools for the students to attend; however they are not willing to have the students see that bullying is a way to get what you want. As a district, it is important that we are teaching the students about moral and ethical behavior. So, to any of those brave individuals that put their necks on the line to get information out to the patrons, I commend you. Thank you for having the guts to stand up to the bully.
It is amazing how a very small group of people (5-9) who WILL be named after the bond passes are the true bullies! Get some guts and put your name on a letter – they are scared their lies will be revealed if they do put their names.
Our children need a leader who will stand up to the bullies and keep fighting for our students. Please note school DID start on time, please note EVERY staff member kept their job, please note most people would run from the hatred people are bringing to our community. THANK YOU MR. FRIEZE – thank you for fighting for our children’s education and community! We believe!!!!!!!!