Tuesday, December 18, 2007

SCHOOL BOARD NAME-CALLING SH!TSTORM

The treatment of Quincy School Board Members in the local blogosphere has been a little rough and that has troubled me. Recently, the way members have been treating each other in the public media has troubled me more. Nobody's view is more noble than the other side's. I am perfectly prepared to believe that all six of the non-comatose members are there because they want to serve the public interest as they see it. The Tort Fund and the Referendum are just handy rallying cries. These folks are going to be hotly contesting things for the foreseeable future. They are performing honorable public service.

But the competing sides in the general public will not start treating the Board as a Whole better until the Board members start treating one another better. Right now, they are the prisoners of their own device. Mr. Mays has made a real effort to restrain his impulsive side. Mr. Bemis' recent letter to the editor was not as dishonest as some Board members made it out to me. Folks, it is possible to disagree without being disagreeable. When you figure it out, the outside forces will have nothing to feed their respective cheerleading points.

Extend Courtesy. You're a legislative body. Legislative bodies can't function without at least understanding the other side's position.

Play nice.

Early edition update: The SEVENTH Board member has now been heard from. Folks, now that we're done taking shots at each other, could we govern for a while?

25 Comments:

At 8:54 AM, December 19, 2007, Blogger TOOKIE said...

I think battle lines have been drawn up . I know an Ex Board member who LOVES to read the next chapter in the Whig. This is about as ugly as it has ever been .

 
At 9:16 AM, December 19, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great post! I wonder if the board could have, instead of threatening to sue the eccentric old music man, could have used his comments as a barometer of public perception? Especially since they will be asking for yes votes soon?

Best thing they could ever so would be to invest in a good PR firm, or take PR classes at the proverbial night school.

 
At 12:23 PM, December 19, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

Yes, to both. You learn a lot more being civil than bellicose. I'm not suggesting anybody abandon principles. It's possible to be polite and disagree at the same time.

Moreover, there is an undercurrent on both sides that the other side has "bad motives". I think we're always on shakey ground when we pretend to know what is truly going on between somebody else's ears. Yes, sometimes the circumstantial evidence is overpowering but a lot of times speculating on what moves somebody is just that.

That can a apply to a lot more than the school Board.

TYBFCB

 
At 1:41 PM, December 19, 2007, Blogger TOOKIE said...

"It's possible to be polite and disagree at the same time."


that sounds like your Golf group there hahahaha


The King of NO votes wrote an execelent letter to the Whig tonight . I think this is an all time High for ink to Whig from Board members .

Sometimes a ton of good comes from the Machine flat out breaking down , like rehab , the beast has to hit rock bottom before it can be fixed .


p.s. : Grand job by the HR folks posting those jobs


* shakes head

 
At 2:05 PM, December 19, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

When the Board continues to use an illegal means to gather tax dollars I believe Gus might have been close to right! They play high and might with the taxpayer trust and wonder why a referendum won't pass. Simple candor and honesty would work. Why the Board of Education fails to try being totally open and honest is unbelievable. Over 30 years of BS and they still don't get it!!

Maybe some day.

 
At 2:14 PM, December 19, 2007, Blogger THE ORACLE... said...

If they hate each other then we know they're keeping an eye on each other.

 
At 8:45 PM, December 19, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

Nah, my golf group is the opposite. We love each other while being thoroughly disagreeable with the volume turned up.

 
At 8:49 PM, December 19, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

1405,

My point exactly. Call people names = nothing changes.

On the "illegal" tax, maybe they "continue" and maybe they don't. You are among the many who fail to recognize that the Board's game plan has evolved as Appellate Courts have ruled. A decision on a prior year is not a decision that this year's budget is the one under analysis.

You are right, though that the relationship between citizens and Board with more than a pinch of distrust is enduring for at least 30 years.

TYFCB

 
At 8:51 PM, December 19, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

O,

You confuse diligence with enmity. Bob Michel and Tip O'Neill liked each other a lot but they controlled the other's excesses.

TYFCB

 
At 9:09 AM, December 20, 2007, Anonymous SeanHeeger.Com said...

I'll play nice when the fess up and take pay cuts.

Welcome to the rest of your Internet lives QPS board.

 
At 10:24 AM, December 20, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

Sean,

They're not paid.

Merry Christmas and TYFCB

 
At 11:52 AM, December 20, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sean is just a felon who has nothing better to do.

 
At 2:47 PM, December 20, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

1152,

Wrong, not constructive, not useful and misses the point entirely.

Sean's a smart guy with a libertarian point of view who is welcome here.

You are too.

TYFCB

 
At 6:38 AM, December 21, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

My question remains:

If the board believes they will need a 25 cent increase in the ed. fund levy f0r 2008 (due in 2009), why did they CUT the levy for 2007 (due next year)?

Rather than dropping it from 4.15 to 3.99 now, why didn't they maintain the 4.15, bank the excess, and go for a 10 cent increaee for 2008? That wouldn't even hit the 5 percent Truth in Taxation limit and they wouldn't even have to ask for a referendum, as far as I can tell.

The 25 cent hike seems counter-intuitive. In fact it looks goofy.

 
At 7:02 AM, December 21, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

Perfectly sensible, if somewhat off topic, question. Maybe a commenter can provide some insight.

TYFCB

 
At 7:29 AM, December 21, 2007, Blogger TOOKIE said...

I think we have 6 of 7 Board members who wrote in , who are we missing ?

The Whig is like an advent calendar hahahaha

 
At 8:42 AM, December 21, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The majority on the board cut a deal on the tort levy, then reneged. What would you do?

 
At 9:57 AM, December 21, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

Tookie,

I was counting my friend Curt because he got his shot in in his "unresignation" article. So it's a clean sweep the way I see it.

TYFCB.

 
At 10:01 AM, December 21, 2007, Blogger TOOKIE said...

Sweet Jesus we do get 7 for 7 !


I am close to starting a write in campaign for Senor Running Cholo ....


Figure if he wins and sends in his vote by proxy ........the Ninja force will grab him .



Cholo for QPSB !

 
At 10:04 AM, December 21, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

0842,

And you have to write letters to the editor to get even? Low creativity and low patience. I have a friend who waited 9 years to get even for a political breach of someone's word, but when he did it was NUCLEAR. The first element of revenge is keeping in mind that the sun doesn't shine on the dog's tail every day.

I, of course, practice Christian belief in redemption and actively forgive those who lie to me and cheat me. Of course, those folks tend to have horrible skiing accidents and their blasting caps tend to become unstable. It's just coincidence.

TYFCB. Letter to the Editor as revenge.....thanks for a smile.

 
At 10:06 AM, December 21, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You said it was revenge, not I.

 
At 10:15 AM, December 21, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

1006,

OK, fine. It's a high-minded effort to inform the public about issues of the day.

What would you do? If somebody truly double deals me, letter to the editor is about number 386 on my list of responses.

TYFCB. I do appreciate your perspective. Just testing the edges of it.

 
At 10:17 AM, December 21, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

In fact, I'm betting at least two of the ones that were double crossed have just enough creativity and patience to serve that dish cold.

Going along to get along is no way to make changes.

 
At 10:19 AM, December 21, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

It's all right Tookie, I'll help you keep your scorecard at home. The action is so fast, if you get up to take a whiz you might lose two innings.

It's been difficult since D-Mac got cheated. We just have to go on as best we can.

BTW, have you noticed that USC had the most trouble against mobile QB's?

TYFCB

 
At 11:58 AM, December 21, 2007, Blogger UMRBlog said...

Nor was "going along to get along" my point. The direct point was the silliness of ALL the letters. My wider pan was the name-calling and general lack of civility.

Never suggested that anybody had to agree to anything.

It will be kind of interesting to watch, though. Get-backs tend to happen when the Getee leasts expects it.

TYFCB

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home