[Vision2020] Judge rules March schoo levy null and void

[Donovan Arnold]

What doesn't make sense to me, perhaps someone can clarify for me, why it is that MSD is so resistant to providing students that need a vocational education, with a vocational education? I believe if they did so, that Weitz would not keep standing in the way of MSD and creating them all these problems. 
   
  If Weitz was doing this for a tax break, I would think he was a jerk. But speaking for those that needed vocational training and education from MSD and didn't get it, I don't feel his actions are in the long term, damaging to students, but rather liberating for those that should be given a relevant education to make a living after graduation.  
   
  His actions are damaging to students now, but only indirectly as a result of MSDs in actions to provide students with a needed education to survive in this world. 
   
  Best,
   
  Donovan

Shirley Ringo <ringoshirl at moscow.com> wrote:
          Visionaries:
   
     What a morning!  My phone has been ringing with questions dealing with the Moscow School District Levy.
   
  First, the Tribune headline by itself has been horrifying, because many people think it deals with the November levy vote.  For anyone in doubt, the judge has ruled the March levy vote null and void.
   
  This is not surprising, since the judge ordered that we revote in November with clarified language.  However, it does create a serious dilemma.
   
  The March vote was certified.  The County Treasurer was forced to send property tax bills based upon that fact.  Now, she has the information that the judge officially declared the March vote null and void.  She is creating a special line showing revenues from property taxes that specifically and separately accounts for the funds provided as a result of certification of the March levy.  At this time, Treasurer Ferguson will await direction concerning the how and whether to disperse those funds.
   
  The possibilities include the following:
   
  School District Attorneys and Weitz attorneys could meet with the judge and seek resolution.  I am told that in a civil suit, the judge could possibly give no further directives unless the plaintiff asks that he do so.  Given the track record of Gerry Weitz, I am sure he still intends to hold the district hostage on the issue of vocational education.  He also wants the District to pay his attorney fees.  It seems unlikely that there will be a meeting of the minds that will help the District.
   
  I am told that the judge could unilaterally give further direction concerning these funds, but that is unlikely.
   
  Treasurer Ferguson, who is in a very awkward situation, could ask the judge for direction.  Undoubtedly, she would prefer that this not be necessary.
   
  Apparently the District lawyer is challenging Judge Bradbury’s jurisdiction in the matter.  This issue may conceivably be pursued.
   
  As is stands, because of deadlines that must be met, the funds from the November levy election cannot be collected until the next school year.  (2008-2009)  Unless there is some intervening action, the District will have to live with adverse actions taken to save money this school year.  
   
  This is my best understanding of the current situation.  Let me know if you have questions.
   
  Shirley Ringo

=======================================================
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
=======================================================

       
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20071121/8b65fe11/attachment-0001.html