[Vision2020] What Your School Administration Doesn't Want YoutoKnow

Thu Apr 28 04:19:54 PDT 2005

Donovan, you weary me.  But just when I decide to ignore you, with my best 
wishes and my sanity intact, you make an assertion that can be corrected 
with one or two simple statements.

1.  The Trail offer was made in mid-December; a new high school had been one 
of the options since the committee's work began.  March 10?  Huh?  And the 
language on the ballot was project-specific, not site-specific, as you know.

2.  Other sites community members as well as FPC members discussed -- which 
weren't available, by the way -- were also farm-area sites, except for 
Joseph Street.   It's the Palouse, a largely rural farming economy.

keely

From: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanjarnold2005 at hotmail.com>
To: melyndahuskey at earthlink.net, vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] What Your School Administration Doesn't Want 
YoutoKnow
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 04:25:10 +0000

Melynda,

Are you saying that chlorophenoxy herbicides is not aerial sprayed on the 
hundreds of acres surrounding the proposed Trail site? Because I think that 
information is correct.

"Can Prall, Radavich, and Willard really intend to assert that the Board of 
Trustees and the District would knowingly expose children to teratogenic 
chemicals for the sake of a new high school?"

NO, I do not think you can jump to that conclusion that they feel the  
members of the Board of Trustees and District would KNOWINGLY do that. 
However, they could be doing it UNKNOWINGLY since they did not have enough 
time to check the site out thoroughly because that site was not decided on 
until after March 10th, 2005. They might not also have consider the dangers 
of the chlorophenoxy herbicides that serious of an issue. The chances of 
getting hit by a car crossing Third St. might be considered a greater threat 
to high school students. But none the less people should know what kind of 
chemicals are being sprayed around the area of the school site, even if it 
is a harmless chemical.

Your leaps of reason and  assumptions always seem to assume the very worst 
in people. Using your reasoning if someone saw a child with his shoe untied 
and said to him he should tie it so he does not fall down, you would accuse 
that person of assuming that the mother of the child and school district 
intended to bash the child's teeth out on the sidewalk on his way home from 
school.  Then you would go off on how inconsiderate it was to think that way 
about his mother and the school district.

It could just be that the school district missed something that could hurt 
the student. They are not perfect, they are people too.

Pointing out that the school would be built on farmland and that farmland is 
sprayed with chemicals is something that the school district should 
consider. I think that is a reasonable point to bring up.

Take Care,

Donovan J Arnold

>From: Melynda Huskey <melyndahuskey at earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: Melynda Huskey <melyndahuskey at earthlink.net>
>To: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: [Vision2020] What Your School Administration Doesn't Want You 
>toKnow
>Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 16:29:19 -0700 (PDT)
>
>In perusing the "What Your School Administration Doesn't Want You to Know" 
>document, I think the piece I found most offensive and troubling was this 
>excerpt:
>
>"Chemical contamination is an issue at the proposed trail school site.  An 
>infant born in a wheat growing rural community in the US has twice the 
>chance of suffering birth defects as one born in a rural place that 
>doesnÂ’t produce wheat, an effect researchers blame on chlorophenoxy 
>herbicides.  Aerial spraying with its frequent overdrift contamination is 
>used for the fields adjoining the proposed 40 acre site for the high 
>school.  Will you worry about your exposure when you want a family?"
>
>Can Prall, Radavich, and Willard really intend to assert that the Board of 
>Trustees and the District would knowingly expose children to teratogenic 
>chemicals for the sake of a new high school?  How irresponsible.  How ugly.
>
>Ms. Radavich now asks that we summon our "compassion" to come together as a 
>community to solve the question of how to meet the educational needs of our 
>children.  Would she characterize the flier as a "compassionate" document?  
>Is it "compassionate" to engender profound mistrust, fear, and anger in 
>young people in an attempt to influence the outcome of an election?
>
>Right now, I myself would not be willing to engage in any discussion with 
>the authors of this document; it's simply too repugnant.  I can't imagine 
>how the trustees and school district employees must be feeling, after so 
>many weeks of outrageous accusations and public incivility.  I think we'll 
>find it very difficult to recover civil and productive community discourse. 
>  How disheartening--much more so than the outcome of a particular bond.
>
>Melynda Huskey
>
>
>
>
>_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to 
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement

_____________________________________________________
List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities 
of the Palouse since 1994.                 http://www.fsr.net                
                 mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/