[Vision2020] Effective v. ineffective idealism

[keely emerinemix]

I'll weigh in on this and answer Jack Porter and Debbie Gray when I have 
more time this afternoon.

I will, however, reiterate that I would feel better about "pragmatic 
choices," and not refer to them as vicious, if those who embraced them had 
demonstrated by their willingness to compromise and see further than their 
own neighborhoods that children are more important than buildings.

Supporting good schools for all children is always morally superior to 
preserving buildings, neighborhoods, and historical interest -- regardless 
of the particular option.

More later,

keely


From: Joan Opyr <joanopyr at moscow.com>
To: Jack Porter <jporter at moscow.com>
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Effective v. ineffective idealism
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 23:06:08 -0800


On Mar 28, 2006, at 8:25 PM, Jack Porter wrote:

>I resent the tone of moral superiority affected by Joan and Keely regarding 
>the alternative high school.  "Throw-away kids" is not a term, or a 
>concept, used by anyone I know.  Those of us who have advocated running a 
>bond levy to rebuild West Park and Russell without the alternative high 
>school thought that plan would get more votes, and it's too bad the school 
>district didn't include that option on the survey so we could find out.
>
>Keely thinks that tactic would be "viciously pragmatic," but I ask, is it 
>more harmful to kids to pass a levy that solves some problems, or to fail 
>one levy after another and solve none?
>
>The list of desirable improvements in the schools is far too long for 
>voters to be willing to fund them all right now.  So should we prioritize 
>and try to eke out a 2/3 majority for something, or refuse to support any 
>proposal that doesn't include someone's favorite project?
>
>Jack Porter
>

As much as I don't want to play tit-for-tat with you, Jack, I don't care if 
you resent my tone or not.  Have at it!  Resent away!  I certainly don't 
think that I'm morally superior to you -- you have the right to voice your 
opinion.  I don't happen to like your opinion, just as I don't like the way 
you have, in the past, spoken about the alternative high school or its 
students as if they were disposable.  Yes, I recognize that the words 
"disposable" and "throw-away" are not words that you have used.  I also 
don't claim that they accurately describe the way you feel about the 
alternative high school or its students.  However, I will stand by the 
assertion that that is the impression I've gotten when you have spoken 
publicly about your favored bond levy.

Moscow's school facilities are in dire straits; perhaps we can agree on 
that.  Where we will disagree is in my belief that under the present 
circumstances, there is no levy of any kind that would pass Moscow with a 
2/3 majority.  I won't vote for a levy that pours money into expensive 
renovations for Russell and West Park while ignoring (even if only for the 
time being) the pressing needs of the high school and the alternative high 
school.  Others won't vote for a levy that includes anything other than 
Russell and West Park.  Another, sizable body (led by Jack Wenders and Dale 
Courtney) won't vote for money for public schools, period, and they will 
resort to their usual deceptive and nasty tactics to ensure any bond's 
defeat.

Effective versus ineffective idealism?  My Aunt Fanny.  We either pony up 
for the schools or we sit back and watch them disintegrate.  Here's my sad 
prediction: we will wait until Russell and West Park are beyond repair 
(perhaps that day has already come for Russell); we'll wait until the high 
school is falling down around our ears; we'll leave the alternative school 
and its students in terrible limbo.  Then, one day in the not too distant 
future, we will gaze upon the ruins of what was once a fine school district 
and wonder, "What the hell happened?"

Neighborhood schools are a good idea; I'm in favor of neighborhood schools.  
But I think it's possible to let our vision of the glories of Russell 
Elementary blind us to the equally pressing needs of McDonald, Lena 
Whitmore, the high school, the junior high, and the alternative school.  I 
have absolutely no faith in the idea that once Russell and West Park have 
been renovated, the same people who fought for that bond will leap forward 
to support a second or a third or a fourth bond to fix the other schools in 
the district.  Call me a cynic, but I don't think it's wise for the entire 
district to rely on the un-bonded promise of future altruism.  Either we 
give a damn about all of our students, or we don't give a damn about any.  
Looks like we'll be voting for the latter.

Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment
www.joanopyr.com

PS: With me, it's all or nothing/Is it all or nothing with you?/It cain't be 
in between/It cain't be now and then/No half and half romance will do . . .

_____________________________________________________
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/