Jump to content
Please Scott B - let’s stop the madness. Criticizing the community for not showing on Wednesday just puts it over the top for me. The election is not certified yet, Dr. Meeks was quoted saying that it was time to take a quick breath, and no one expected (rightly so) that this was going to be on the agenda only days after electing a new board. It is almost as if nothing over the past few weeks has even registered.
When the new board has taken their positions, this topic needs to be pulled out of the everyday agenda and treated like the issue that it is. Citizen committee members need to be identified and we move ahead with the momentum and transparency that is present. This is a huge project, and it needs to be run as such - with the right people leading the charge.
“Being that (the Overlook property) is the last large piece of property in the town of Steamboat Springs, I believe we have an obligation to our students and our community to plan for the future,” Crossan said.
Sorry Russell - Robin is making absolutely no sense at all. What part of the community rejecting the proposed plan by a resounding 4:1 margin makes one think that this is the logical next step?
You are dead-on Anne. The mistake made here was that the current Board didn’t get the community buy-in that they continue to state - if they did, we would not be in this state of contention.
The community is ready to move on a revised and collaborative plan, and once this plan is defeated we can move forward on one that truly embraces this community as a while.
You bring up a very good point Pete - this issue is dividing this community and it is apparent that there will be lasting repercussions after this is over.
I put this question back to the school board - you’ve maintained that you spent countless hours getting community buy-in from the start of this process, and yet here we are with an opposition group that is growing by the day. Let’s give the benefit of the doubt and say that you truly thought that you were presenting a solution that the community was behind (per your year of meetings) - it is pretty evident now that this was not the case, even if no one will admit it.
If this was truly the right plan, you would be working with the community right now on an action plan vs. trying to convince everyone that it is what they want.
The reality is you have now achieved what you originally set out to do - mobilize the community behind this important issue. You have everyones ear, and the opportunity to take a step back and really develop a plan that the community can get behind. My guess is that ego will get in the way and prevent this from happening, but the opportunity is here to stop, revisit the plan and get a true community buy-in to move forward.
Our family is voting NO on this issue and urge other families to do the same, and then become part of a solution that we can all get behind. More here at http://www.citizensforabetterplansteamboat.com.
"If the NO folks have their way nothing will improve for years. A NO vote means no plan nothing. Let’s hope that doesn’t happen."
Correction Russell - a no vote means that we take this back to the table and come up with a plan that works. The all-or-nothing scare tactic is just that - a tactic. Remember Russell that parents on both side of this issue want nothing more to improve our already stellar school system, regardless of how negative you paint the other side.
"We understand some have called for a “better plan.” But their objections were raised late in the process, are mostly centered around personal conveniences and ignore the input of hundreds of parents, educators, business owners and other community members who spent a considerable amount of time deliberating this past year to create the “best plan.”
Come on Scott - this is absolute nonsense. Personal conveniences? Please elaborate so that I can full understand what selfish acts are going on over here. Your continued portrayal of the opposing group as a bunch selfish parents vs. a group that wants to revisit what we consider to be a rushed plan is insulting and just continues to lower your groups credibility in my eyes.
Ken - your continued assumption that we are parents who care only about our needs is the only thing that is insulting on this blog. Do you really think that this is the driving force behind those of us that disagree with this course of action, that this is our “primary focus”? The high school location is a large part of this discussion, but it is only a part of it and there are many other reasons behind our desire to find a different solution.
And your label of us as “elitists” is laughable. It is a slap in the face of all of us that have moved here to make a life for ourselves and our children - many at a cost to their own time and needs in the hopes of providing a better life for our children. As a relative newcomer to this town, you might want to get to know your neighbors a bit better and revisit that offensive label - this is a debate around a proposed plan with elements that this community disagrees on, and we will continue to function as a community when it is over. Your tactic of belittling your neighbors who disagree with your opinion is out of place in a place like Steamboat, but my guess is that it will do little to stop you at this point.
We are voting no on this proposed plan, and you can see why at http://www.citizensforabetterplansteamboat.com
Ah Russell, the tune may change but the song remains the same.
Let’s address yet another creative name given to the group who would thinks that the current proposal just does not work- the “sarcastic folks” or “Johnny-come-latelies” as you stated in your previous post. Lets put some fact behind the claim that all of these people just happened to show up out of the blue and oppose this great “yearlong” plan. A question for you to answer Russell:
-When was the first meeting held on this subject?
If I am reading “year long” right, then the first meeting was held back in 2014. The claim continues to be that all of these meetings were held and no one spoke up, so lets determine how many meetings we are talking out and move on from there.
Quite the contrary Russell - our group is far from negative and backward looking. Simply because we are “against” this current initiative does not make our statements negative - rather we see a different path to achieving the same goal. If the roles were reversed, your objection to the proposed initiative might seem negative as well.
I would argue that we are taking a more pragmatic approach to this issue - preserving the neighborhood school that all hold so dear and not jumping on a plan that not only destroys that ideal (and the argument that we will have a middle school there does not justify it in my mind) but puts a new tax burden on this community. We say no, and we say that we can still achieve what we want by other means.
Ken - it looks like we shared the same experiences growing up as I was a Gwinnett County kid (Brookwood High) who watched the area go from farmland to sprawl overnight. I agree that we need to avoid what was done there at all costs - we moved here from downtown Atlanta 5 years ago and are not looking back.
I think this is a discussion that has proponents on both sides, and both sides can present a credible argument. I appreciate the respectful tone taken here and look forward to a lively debate gong forward!
Last login: Sunday, May 8, 2016
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.
Tablet version |