What is the future of the charter school movement in Colorado? Concerned parents who want a better education for their children are the driving force behind the formation and running of charter schools. However, who in fact controls these schools can be greatly compromised regardless of the current charter school laws in Colorado. If the local school board or teachers’ union is hostile to charter schools, the founding families will likely have to give up control to a charter management company in exchange for the financing to fight these two groups. Unfortunately, this confrontational hostility is commonplace throughout the state. The only option to hiring a management company would be for the founding families to put their own homes up as collateral on a school facility and personally bankroll the thousands of dollars in legal fees and other fees to comply with the overbearing requirements of their local school board and possibly multiple hearings before the State Board of Education.
It has become a game of bait and switch in districts across the state. Submit one group of documents and you can be sure the school district will want another. The districts' staff won’t offer assistance or clarification because that would defeat the purpose of their primary goal of denying the charter application or to create roadblocks between the founding families and an approved charter contract. They will coach the board members about what to ask or say at board meetings to postpone their decision. They will make sure they cost these concerned parents as much money and time as they can. Valuable dollars that could be used to buy library books or computers for their new school are instead wasted on the preparation of documents for meeting after meeting. Regardless of the amount of effort or money invested, be prepared for the school district’s inevitable denial.
Now the parents have to pay thousands more to appeal their denial to the State Board of Education. Once that body overturns the district’s initial denial, directing the school district to approve the charter application, the parents are forced to return to the district where both parities are directed to ”negotiate in good faith” to reach an agreement on the charter contract. But of course the parents are now subjected to more time and money to present even more of the same documents to the school district in meeting after meeting, while the district works on their next excuse to justify a second denial. Now the parents spend thousands of dollars more to go back to the State Board of Education because the district is unwilling to negotiate a fair contract. Then the State Board of Education overturns the district’s denial again and they demand the school board approve the contract. So the parents go back to the district for more contract negotiations. More money, paperwork, and time are wasted. But there’s more--then the district will come up with as many roadblocks or excuses as it can to delay the opening of the charter school for another year of two, regardless of their being a fully stocked facility and confirmed roster of students waiting.
These underhanded techniques to dodge the approval of charter schools have been shared among the hostile school districts and through the teachers’ unions. You see, school districts have no moral objection to taking tens, and in some cases hundreds, of thousands of taxpayers’ dollars out of the classrooms to fight educational choice. If they don’t, they have to face the wrath of the teachers’ union on Election Day. It takes a strong and independently wealthy group of parents to fight this battle. Not many have the means, and even fewer will in our current financial situation. Forget charter schools being an option for the economically disadvantaged or scholastically underperforming areas as they were originally intended to be.
So how can concerned parents compete with the thousands of dollars a school board can take out of the classroom to fight efforts to establish charter schools? Charter school management companies are coming to the rescue. They see a golden opportunity in our state and others to take advantage of this situation, claiming that their only interest is to help the founding parents. They ride in on their white horses and put up the funds to fight the school district, secure or build a facility, and help open the school. Sounds great, doesn’t it? Well, not too fast. In many places, including in our school district, the charter schools’ founding families have been forced out. When the founding charter school governing board makes decisions based on the ethics of the issue or in the best interests of the students, rather than the financial interests of the management company, the board discovers that they are all alone. Even if they can prove that the management company has willfully misled the board or refuses to provide the board with necessary information or documents, who then pays for an attorney to defend the board and the school’s best interests? How can the board force the management company to adhere to the contractual agreement? These management companies have financial resources that approach, and may exceed, that of the local school district. You can’t recall the management company’s board of directors and once they have invested millions to get “their” school built you can almost forget about firing them. You won’t believe some of the tactics they will use to rid the board of leaders who take their fiduciary responsibilities seriously. Remember, board members are also parents of students attending the school.
So what is the answer? How can we get the formation and administration of charter schools back into the hands of concerned parents? We need a level playing field. All public charter schools need to be approved by a state chartering authority that is non partisan. Currently, the only way you can have your school approved by the state’s charter authority is to live in a school district that the State Board of Education has determined to be hostile. How is a school district deemed to be hostile? Well, the concerned parents have to spend even more money to convince the State Board of Education of their hostility--every year. The school districts and teachers’ unions know this system well and know how to manipulate it. They will make it clear to certain members on the State Board of Education that they will oppose any attempt to run for future office—and sometimes they have the moxie to do it during a recess of the State Board of Education meeting. They will often deny a few charter schools and then let one in (how could they possibly be hostile then?). No, the system is biased towards maintaining the status quo and to significantly discourage attempts for educational choice—except for the wealthy and those willing to turn over their charter schools to a management company.
One representative for a local charter school management company recently told me the company would rather parents not be on the boards of their schools at all. In Colorado, charter schools are supposed to be run and controlled by parents. It’s time for our legislature to do what is right to uphold the law. Even out the playing field. Allow economically deprived parents to have the same opportunity as wealthy and affluent parents to bring a better education to their children. Allow parents to go directly to a state chartering authority, a supportive and helpful organization, to get their schools approved. Stop letting the school board and teachers’ union circumvent parents’ rights to educational choices. It’s not fair, not right, and if changes aren’t made our educational system will continue to fall further and further behind.
Michael P. Simone
Former Mayor
Town of Firestone
Former Governing Board Member and Founding Family Member
Imagine Charter School at Firestone
Friday, April 3, 2009
Monday, July 21, 2008
A Few Excerpts From The Local Media
The following is the first paragraph from an article written by Brad Jolly for the Your Hub section of the Rocky Mountain News:
“One might be inclined to admire the tenacity of the St. Vrain School Board. Their unshakable belief that money will fix public schools allows them to plod ahead with their failurist funding model against the very teeth of a gale of overwhelming data demonstrating its futility.”
The following was taken from a July 14, 2008 article written by Rocky Mountain News reporter Julie Poppen:
So the Rev. Al Sharpton and Newt Gingrich sit down to talk about education . . .
No, this isn't the beginning of a joke.
In fact, the fiery New York civil rights leader and 2004 presidential candidate and the conservative, but equally verbose, former House speaker are in fact on the same page when it comes to education.
It's going to take such "odd couples" to fix the nation's ailing educational system. That's what a group of educators, politicians and community activists said at a news conference Sunday at the Denver School of Science and Technology as they touted the recently unveiled Education Equality Project.
The sweeping national initiative strives to dismantle the status quo in public education and re-orient schools around students rather than political factions or the adults in charge.
The effort was launched by Sharpton and Joel Klein, chancellor of New York City schools.
"Here we are, 54 years after Brown vs. Board of Education . . . after we promised every kid access to an equal educational opportunity and we're not delivering on it," Klein said. "That crisis is going to get much worse because of what's going on globally - the competitive threats to this nation."
Klein said a national discourse on school reform is needed, followed by hard action.
Movement backers are big on statistics.
For starters, the achievement gap between African-American/Hispanic students and white/Asian students has hardly narrowed since 1992, remaining at 20 points, they note.
White 12th-graders are, on average, four years ahead of their black peers. More than 23 percent of Hispanics between the ages of 16 and 24 have dropped out of high school, compared with about 12 percent of African- Americans and 7 percent of whites.
In Colorado, only 75 percent of students graduate from high school and of those only 40 percent go to college.
"The United States has a history of incremental reforms," said Bill Kurtz, principal of the Denver School of Science and Technology, a charter school. "We don't need incremental. We need dramatic change."
Kurtz pointed out the successes he's had with students labeled at-risk. One hundred percent of the school's first graduating class was accepted into four-year colleges, he said.
Mayor John Hickenlooper said he couldn't imagine any other endeavor in which so many people invest so much time and money with "so little success."
"How do we change that and ramp up the way we go about it and the expectations to which we hold ourselves?" Hickenlooper asked.
Project's goals
* Get effective teachers in every classroom and effective principals in every school by giving them the training they need and paying them what they're worth - and making tough decisions about the teachers who aren't performing.
* Empower parents by giving them a meaningful voice in where their children are educated, including public charter schools.
* Create accountability for teachers, principals and central office administrators.
* Commit to making every decision about who is hired, how money is spent, and where resources are deployed with a single focus - what best serves students.
* Call on parents and students to demand more from their schools and themselves.
* Stand up to political forces and interests who seek to preserve a failed system.
“One might be inclined to admire the tenacity of the St. Vrain School Board. Their unshakable belief that money will fix public schools allows them to plod ahead with their failurist funding model against the very teeth of a gale of overwhelming data demonstrating its futility.”
The following was taken from a July 14, 2008 article written by Rocky Mountain News reporter Julie Poppen:
So the Rev. Al Sharpton and Newt Gingrich sit down to talk about education . . .
No, this isn't the beginning of a joke.
In fact, the fiery New York civil rights leader and 2004 presidential candidate and the conservative, but equally verbose, former House speaker are in fact on the same page when it comes to education.
It's going to take such "odd couples" to fix the nation's ailing educational system. That's what a group of educators, politicians and community activists said at a news conference Sunday at the Denver School of Science and Technology as they touted the recently unveiled Education Equality Project.
The sweeping national initiative strives to dismantle the status quo in public education and re-orient schools around students rather than political factions or the adults in charge.
The effort was launched by Sharpton and Joel Klein, chancellor of New York City schools.
"Here we are, 54 years after Brown vs. Board of Education . . . after we promised every kid access to an equal educational opportunity and we're not delivering on it," Klein said. "That crisis is going to get much worse because of what's going on globally - the competitive threats to this nation."
Klein said a national discourse on school reform is needed, followed by hard action.
Movement backers are big on statistics.
For starters, the achievement gap between African-American/Hispanic students and white/Asian students has hardly narrowed since 1992, remaining at 20 points, they note.
White 12th-graders are, on average, four years ahead of their black peers. More than 23 percent of Hispanics between the ages of 16 and 24 have dropped out of high school, compared with about 12 percent of African- Americans and 7 percent of whites.
In Colorado, only 75 percent of students graduate from high school and of those only 40 percent go to college.
"The United States has a history of incremental reforms," said Bill Kurtz, principal of the Denver School of Science and Technology, a charter school. "We don't need incremental. We need dramatic change."
Kurtz pointed out the successes he's had with students labeled at-risk. One hundred percent of the school's first graduating class was accepted into four-year colleges, he said.
Mayor John Hickenlooper said he couldn't imagine any other endeavor in which so many people invest so much time and money with "so little success."
"How do we change that and ramp up the way we go about it and the expectations to which we hold ourselves?" Hickenlooper asked.
Project's goals
* Get effective teachers in every classroom and effective principals in every school by giving them the training they need and paying them what they're worth - and making tough decisions about the teachers who aren't performing.
* Empower parents by giving them a meaningful voice in where their children are educated, including public charter schools.
* Create accountability for teachers, principals and central office administrators.
* Commit to making every decision about who is hired, how money is spent, and where resources are deployed with a single focus - what best serves students.
* Call on parents and students to demand more from their schools and themselves.
* Stand up to political forces and interests who seek to preserve a failed system.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Fixing Our Schools
The following is taken from the July 6, 2008 issue of Parade magazine.
Former Labor Secretary, Congressman and Senator, William Brock, was interviewed concerning our public school system. He leads the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce, created to report on the state of education in the US. Here are a few quotes from the article:
--"In the last 25 years spending has risen 240% while performance has barely changed."
--"Only 68% of students graduate from high school, and many states require only eighth-grade skills in reading and math to get a diploma."
--"...from the very things that have made America special: critical thinking, creativity, innovation, and teamwork."
--"We recruit new teachers largely from the bottom 30% of entering college students..."
--"Most (teachers) feel that they have no voice in their schools."
--"..no one really wants to admit that we are leaving millions of children behind."
--"Nothing is more important than education. Absolutely nothing."
Mr. Brock's comments are not politically correct and will upset those who blindly support the traditional public school system, i.e. local school boards, teacher's unions and those who worship these organizations. These groups have been looking the other way for almost 30 years as achievement scores have decreased. They have fought attempts at educational competition, pay for performance for teachers, and have used children as shields as they ask for more and more of our precious tax dollars.
Almost everyone agrees a good educational system is vital to vibrant economic health. Is it a coincidence our economy has been in a steady decline for almost 30 years, while at the same time, our public education system has been failing our children? Our students' education is being left in the dust of other industrialized nations--and some non-industrialized nations. It's time for a revolutionary change before it gets too late.
Former Labor Secretary, Congressman and Senator, William Brock, was interviewed concerning our public school system. He leads the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce, created to report on the state of education in the US. Here are a few quotes from the article:
--"In the last 25 years spending has risen 240% while performance has barely changed."
--"Only 68% of students graduate from high school, and many states require only eighth-grade skills in reading and math to get a diploma."
--"...from the very things that have made America special: critical thinking, creativity, innovation, and teamwork."
--"We recruit new teachers largely from the bottom 30% of entering college students..."
--"Most (teachers) feel that they have no voice in their schools."
--"..no one really wants to admit that we are leaving millions of children behind."
--"Nothing is more important than education. Absolutely nothing."
Mr. Brock's comments are not politically correct and will upset those who blindly support the traditional public school system, i.e. local school boards, teacher's unions and those who worship these organizations. These groups have been looking the other way for almost 30 years as achievement scores have decreased. They have fought attempts at educational competition, pay for performance for teachers, and have used children as shields as they ask for more and more of our precious tax dollars.
Almost everyone agrees a good educational system is vital to vibrant economic health. Is it a coincidence our economy has been in a steady decline for almost 30 years, while at the same time, our public education system has been failing our children? Our students' education is being left in the dust of other industrialized nations--and some non-industrialized nations. It's time for a revolutionary change before it gets too late.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Anonymous Cowards--Who Needs Some Cash
While I was mayor those who disagreed with my opinions rarely offered to discuss their points of view. What developed was the proliferation of anonymous cowards, mostly posting lies and misinformation on Tri-Town.com. Then these cowards decided to invade my family's privacy by showing up at midnight and burning dog feces on my doorstep and ringing my doorbell late at night. When that didn't scare me into changing my position, they went even further. They decided to involve those who associated with me. First, it was posting and spreading the worst of rumors about my personal life, then trying to effect my business, and lastly, involving Imagine Charter School.
I understand when you are in the public eye you are more prone to attacks and sometimes that is part of doing business. In the days of the Internet it is getting too easy to say anything you want about anybody and not have to identify yourself. Once I left office I honestly thought things would die down and my life, and those of my friends, would go back to normal. I guess I was wrong. Ringing of the doorbell late at night still happens (oddly, after I post a new article on my blog).
This past weekend there was more harassment. Again, this happened just after I posted 4 more articles on my blog.
So now I can't even use my constitutional right to freedom of speech without these cowards continually harassing me, my family, my friends, my business and a public charter school? If anyone has evidence of who is doing this please let me know and I'll reward you with some cash--the "bigger" the name, the "bigger" the cash. These people need to be exposed for who they are--cowards.
I understand when you are in the public eye you are more prone to attacks and sometimes that is part of doing business. In the days of the Internet it is getting too easy to say anything you want about anybody and not have to identify yourself. Once I left office I honestly thought things would die down and my life, and those of my friends, would go back to normal. I guess I was wrong. Ringing of the doorbell late at night still happens (oddly, after I post a new article on my blog).
This past weekend there was more harassment. Again, this happened just after I posted 4 more articles on my blog.
So now I can't even use my constitutional right to freedom of speech without these cowards continually harassing me, my family, my friends, my business and a public charter school? If anyone has evidence of who is doing this please let me know and I'll reward you with some cash--the "bigger" the name, the "bigger" the cash. These people need to be exposed for who they are--cowards.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Water Water Everywhere
The Town of Firestone has been very generous over the past several years by donating millions of dollars in land and cash to help the school district, library district and fire district build new buildings in our town. These entities are all taxing districts, managing budgets into the hundreds of millions of dollars and with the ability to tax their residents. The Firestone Town Board helped them fund their projects instead of having them go to their taxpayers.
The town donated 10 shares of water to the St. Vrain Valley School District for the new Centennial Elementary School. Now it has come to my attention the Town of Firestone, run by an obvious pro-traditional public school biased town board, is requiring the other new public school, Imagine (who incidentally doesn’t have the ability to ask taxpayers for more funds), to buy 16 water shares. This is an increase from the 4 shares that was originally estimated by the staff. 12 more shares will cost well over $100,000. Imagine doesn’t have a budget into the hundreds of millions of dollars as does the St. Vrain Valley School District.
Where is the fairness here? Imagine is so afraid of retaliation by the new board they have agreed to remove a banner the town doesn’t have legal control over. They are afraid to point out to the new board the unfairness of asking for so many more water shares and the unfairness of providing millions in support to other governmental agencies and not help the new public school, Imagine. This new school will increase property values and eliminate severe overcrowding in the Tri-Town schools. Those of us who know the inner workings of the water “scheme” know that Firestone has so many extra water shares that they lease many out to farmers every year. The town staff told us giving 10 shares to the school district for Centennial won’t cost us a penny for 20-30 years. So where are the shares for the other new public school? Where is the fairness? Where is the support from this board for a new public charter school that will house 750 new students? Running a “politically correct” town is not how you build bridges.
The town donated 10 shares of water to the St. Vrain Valley School District for the new Centennial Elementary School. Now it has come to my attention the Town of Firestone, run by an obvious pro-traditional public school biased town board, is requiring the other new public school, Imagine (who incidentally doesn’t have the ability to ask taxpayers for more funds), to buy 16 water shares. This is an increase from the 4 shares that was originally estimated by the staff. 12 more shares will cost well over $100,000. Imagine doesn’t have a budget into the hundreds of millions of dollars as does the St. Vrain Valley School District.
Where is the fairness here? Imagine is so afraid of retaliation by the new board they have agreed to remove a banner the town doesn’t have legal control over. They are afraid to point out to the new board the unfairness of asking for so many more water shares and the unfairness of providing millions in support to other governmental agencies and not help the new public school, Imagine. This new school will increase property values and eliminate severe overcrowding in the Tri-Town schools. Those of us who know the inner workings of the water “scheme” know that Firestone has so many extra water shares that they lease many out to farmers every year. The town staff told us giving 10 shares to the school district for Centennial won’t cost us a penny for 20-30 years. So where are the shares for the other new public school? Where is the fairness? Where is the support from this board for a new public charter school that will house 750 new students? Running a “politically correct” town is not how you build bridges.
3 New Posts
I added 3 new posts below. The first concerns the school district's tax increase proposal. The second is about "mayoral sacrifice". The third is a letter to the editor printed in this week's Farmer and Miner.
"The Call"
I finally got “the call" I’ve heard others have gotten. This is "the call” the St. Vrain Valley School District has commissioned to gauge if there is a desire for the voters to approve an average of $270/year more in school property taxes. This increase is on top of the school property tax increase imposed by executive order by the governor last year (this was recently held unconstitutional but is still in effect and is going to the Colorado Supreme Court), the large increase in property assessments (effectively increasing funds to the school district), and Amendment 23 (which still increases school funding by 1% per year above the rate of inflation).
This “call” took about 20 minutes to complete and was so biased in the questioning I almost started laughing as the questions were being asked. The lady spoke very quickly but I tried to take notes as quickly as I could. Here is what I was able to record and remember:
--How are things going in this part of Colorado?
--Are my taxes too high, low or about right?
--Where do my children, if I have any, go to school?
--In what field do I work and how much do I make?
--Would I consider myself a conservative or liberal and to what extreme?
--What is my educational level?
--Where is my level of knowledge concerning the SVVSD and the bond proposal?
--I was asked if I would approve a $211 million bond. Now this was the last part of the question. It was prefaced by a litany of items that the bond would include and the way it was presented was to “guilt” me into agreeing to support it.
--Once I stated I wouldn’t support it I was offered another option—this time for $182 million. Again, with a litany of items before I was asked the question.
--Next I was asked if I would support a $16.5 million mil levy override. Again, I was presented with a list that was meant to tug at my heart. It made me feel like I was a bad person if I didn’t agree because it included money to rehire the 85 laid off teachers. That was only the tip of the “guilt” iceberg. I noticed the caller didn’t say the bond was $16.5 million yearly and I had to ask her that question—but of course I’m informed and knew this.
--When I answered I wouldn’t support this I was offered other options of $14.5 and $12.5 million. Again, the “guilt” list was given before I could answer.
--Since I had answered “no” to her questions, I was obviously directed on a flow chart to an area where I would be asked about my support for specific items. There were questions about Skyline, Frederick, restoring programs, etc. This is where the “hard sell” really took off and where it was so difficult not to start laughing.
--Now after all this I was told something to the effect that “after hearing about all the issues I would like to ask you the same questions again”. She then asked me one more time if I would support the bond and mil levy override.
Some interesting points:
--This “survey” was nothing of the sort. It was worded and conducted to present a one-sided case and to “guilt” people into supporting it. I thought it was interesting that the caller wanted to ask me if I supported the tax increases after hearing about the “issues”. I only heard the SVVSD’s side of this issue.
--I can’t imagine how much money was taken out of the classroom to fund this.
--Who thinks it is appropriate to spend taxpayers’ money for an expensive “survey” that is biased and meant to present one side of the story?
--The costs for this on top of the numerous, slick, expensive, junk mail items from the school district will solidify the electorate’s suspicion about how our education dollars are being spent.
This “call” took about 20 minutes to complete and was so biased in the questioning I almost started laughing as the questions were being asked. The lady spoke very quickly but I tried to take notes as quickly as I could. Here is what I was able to record and remember:
--How are things going in this part of Colorado?
--Are my taxes too high, low or about right?
--Where do my children, if I have any, go to school?
--In what field do I work and how much do I make?
--Would I consider myself a conservative or liberal and to what extreme?
--What is my educational level?
--Where is my level of knowledge concerning the SVVSD and the bond proposal?
--I was asked if I would approve a $211 million bond. Now this was the last part of the question. It was prefaced by a litany of items that the bond would include and the way it was presented was to “guilt” me into agreeing to support it.
--Once I stated I wouldn’t support it I was offered another option—this time for $182 million. Again, with a litany of items before I was asked the question.
--Next I was asked if I would support a $16.5 million mil levy override. Again, I was presented with a list that was meant to tug at my heart. It made me feel like I was a bad person if I didn’t agree because it included money to rehire the 85 laid off teachers. That was only the tip of the “guilt” iceberg. I noticed the caller didn’t say the bond was $16.5 million yearly and I had to ask her that question—but of course I’m informed and knew this.
--When I answered I wouldn’t support this I was offered other options of $14.5 and $12.5 million. Again, the “guilt” list was given before I could answer.
--Since I had answered “no” to her questions, I was obviously directed on a flow chart to an area where I would be asked about my support for specific items. There were questions about Skyline, Frederick, restoring programs, etc. This is where the “hard sell” really took off and where it was so difficult not to start laughing.
--Now after all this I was told something to the effect that “after hearing about all the issues I would like to ask you the same questions again”. She then asked me one more time if I would support the bond and mil levy override.
Some interesting points:
--This “survey” was nothing of the sort. It was worded and conducted to present a one-sided case and to “guilt” people into supporting it. I thought it was interesting that the caller wanted to ask me if I supported the tax increases after hearing about the “issues”. I only heard the SVVSD’s side of this issue.
--I can’t imagine how much money was taken out of the classroom to fund this.
--Who thinks it is appropriate to spend taxpayers’ money for an expensive “survey” that is biased and meant to present one side of the story?
--The costs for this on top of the numerous, slick, expensive, junk mail items from the school district will solidify the electorate’s suspicion about how our education dollars are being spent.
Un "Inform(ed) Firestone"
As a Firestone resident and member of the Planning Commission, I take the efforts of ‘Inform Firestone’ and the potential negative impact very seriously. They are providing propaganda but haven’t made efforts to seek answers to their stated questions, implying ‘Inform Firestone’ doesn’t really want to be informed. I had a conversation outside of King Soopers with the group’s leader, Dan Sanger, and one of their signature gatherers, a Boulder County resident, in which I provided answers to the originally stated questions and concerns of ‘Inform Firestone’ and countered the negative religious position. At the conclusion of our conversation, Mr. Sanger stated that the primary motivation of ‘Inform Firestone’ is to impress upon Firestone residents that they should take the time to become informed and involved in their local government. That lesson could come at an extremely high price.
The factually inaccurate scare tactics of ‘Inform Firestone’ could cost the residents of Firestone tens of millions of dollars in lost development impact fees and commercial tax revenues from this one development alone. That money could be used to fund things such as public safety, building additional sidewalks, maintenance and upkeep of parks and trails, and a myriad of other improvements. However, the result of their actions may impact more than just the Union development. Ultimately, this is about economic development in Firestone, now and in the future. This loss has the potential to grow from tens of millions of dollars to hundreds of millions in years to come. That’s a significant negative impact on Firestone’s future.
The processing of the Union development annexation followed the documented process through numerous public meetings in the same manner and general time line as all previous developments. Like other entities, including Weld County and the City of Longmont, the Firestone Planning Commission and Town Board follow a process that utilizes engineers, attorneys, planners, and staff for continuous input. Nothing was done “behind closed doors”, as insinuated. Granted, very few Firestone residents chose to attend the many public meetings where the Union annexation was publicly posted in advance on the agenda as a discussion or action item. However, the public has always been welcome to attend and hear first hand all of the details discussed openly, just as Longmont’s City Planner chose to attend back when Firestone’s proposed boundary extension was on the agenda.
After sitting through numerous meetings in which we poured over all of the details, I personally believe that approving the Union development was the right decision for Firestone. This opportunity is now being jeopardized by a few people who call themselves ‘Inform Firestone’. They are willing to risk the loss of tens of millions of dollars by placing that decision in the hands of Firestone residents who chose not to participate in those many public meetings to learn the facts, therefore rendering themselves unable to make an informed decision in the best interest of Firestone.
Firestone residents, your tax dollars and future quality of life are being put at risk by ‘Inform Firestone’. Do you want to trust your town representatives’ decisions, made after countless hours weighing the facts with the benefit of the expertise and guidance of numerous professionals? The effort undertaken by ‘Inform Firestone’ doesn’t even provide a solution to their stated goal, and will be a lesson paid for with irreversible consequences. My recommendation, don’t succumb to the scare tactics of ‘Inform Firestone’. If you signed the petition and feel that you were misled, call the Firestone Town Clerk and ask how you can withdraw your signature. I would also recommend going before the Firestone Town Board and letting them know that you feel you were misled by ‘Inform Firestone’.
It’s your quality of life, family budget, and property value that will be directly impacted for years to come by your decision on this issue. Regardless of the true intent behind ‘Inform Firestone’ or the outcome of a vote, the Union development is already approved in Weld County and will be built. If built in Firestone the town will reap millions in impact fees and future commercial tax income to fund improvements that will benefit the whole community for years to come.
Wendy Richards
Planning Commissioner
Town of Firestone
The factually inaccurate scare tactics of ‘Inform Firestone’ could cost the residents of Firestone tens of millions of dollars in lost development impact fees and commercial tax revenues from this one development alone. That money could be used to fund things such as public safety, building additional sidewalks, maintenance and upkeep of parks and trails, and a myriad of other improvements. However, the result of their actions may impact more than just the Union development. Ultimately, this is about economic development in Firestone, now and in the future. This loss has the potential to grow from tens of millions of dollars to hundreds of millions in years to come. That’s a significant negative impact on Firestone’s future.
The processing of the Union development annexation followed the documented process through numerous public meetings in the same manner and general time line as all previous developments. Like other entities, including Weld County and the City of Longmont, the Firestone Planning Commission and Town Board follow a process that utilizes engineers, attorneys, planners, and staff for continuous input. Nothing was done “behind closed doors”, as insinuated. Granted, very few Firestone residents chose to attend the many public meetings where the Union annexation was publicly posted in advance on the agenda as a discussion or action item. However, the public has always been welcome to attend and hear first hand all of the details discussed openly, just as Longmont’s City Planner chose to attend back when Firestone’s proposed boundary extension was on the agenda.
After sitting through numerous meetings in which we poured over all of the details, I personally believe that approving the Union development was the right decision for Firestone. This opportunity is now being jeopardized by a few people who call themselves ‘Inform Firestone’. They are willing to risk the loss of tens of millions of dollars by placing that decision in the hands of Firestone residents who chose not to participate in those many public meetings to learn the facts, therefore rendering themselves unable to make an informed decision in the best interest of Firestone.
Firestone residents, your tax dollars and future quality of life are being put at risk by ‘Inform Firestone’. Do you want to trust your town representatives’ decisions, made after countless hours weighing the facts with the benefit of the expertise and guidance of numerous professionals? The effort undertaken by ‘Inform Firestone’ doesn’t even provide a solution to their stated goal, and will be a lesson paid for with irreversible consequences. My recommendation, don’t succumb to the scare tactics of ‘Inform Firestone’. If you signed the petition and feel that you were misled, call the Firestone Town Clerk and ask how you can withdraw your signature. I would also recommend going before the Firestone Town Board and letting them know that you feel you were misled by ‘Inform Firestone’.
It’s your quality of life, family budget, and property value that will be directly impacted for years to come by your decision on this issue. Regardless of the true intent behind ‘Inform Firestone’ or the outcome of a vote, the Union development is already approved in Weld County and will be built. If built in Firestone the town will reap millions in impact fees and future commercial tax income to fund improvements that will benefit the whole community for years to come.
Wendy Richards
Planning Commissioner
Town of Firestone
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
"Bannergate"
Update 6-12-08
Within 24 hours of this post all banners and illegal signs in front of the Dairy Queen complex were removed--except the $5 banner by Quiznos. I couldn't get this kind of response when I was mayor.
Once the new Firestone/SVVSD board was elected in April, the first order of business was to demand a banner, placed by another governmental agency--a public charter school, to be removed. The temporary banner was placed to notify citizens about the opening of another public educational opportunity in the Tri-Towns. This act most likely violated the state laws concerning one governmental agency trying to control another. Not wanting to be subject to retaliation, the charter school board decided to take the banner down.
As I have driven around town since the election I have seen the proliferation of banners and makeshift signs in front of the Dairy Queen complex (partially owned by the president of the Chamber of Commerce--a large supporter of the 5 new board members). I'm sure our CSO's, board members and staff pass by this building on a daily basis. Oddly, the number of signs and banners continues to increase. I hope this is just an unintentional oversight and will be rectified soon. Pictures will follow.
Banners placed by Melody Homes on fences surrounding the Sagebrush neighborhood have never been removed after repeated requests. Let's hope our new town government will stop looking the other way when "profit centers" violate our ordinances and enforce them as strongly as they do when trying to bully the entities they don't have jurisdiction over.
Within 24 hours of this post all banners and illegal signs in front of the Dairy Queen complex were removed--except the $5 banner by Quiznos. I couldn't get this kind of response when I was mayor.
Once the new Firestone/SVVSD board was elected in April, the first order of business was to demand a banner, placed by another governmental agency--a public charter school, to be removed. The temporary banner was placed to notify citizens about the opening of another public educational opportunity in the Tri-Towns. This act most likely violated the state laws concerning one governmental agency trying to control another. Not wanting to be subject to retaliation, the charter school board decided to take the banner down.
As I have driven around town since the election I have seen the proliferation of banners and makeshift signs in front of the Dairy Queen complex (partially owned by the president of the Chamber of Commerce--a large supporter of the 5 new board members). I'm sure our CSO's, board members and staff pass by this building on a daily basis. Oddly, the number of signs and banners continues to increase. I hope this is just an unintentional oversight and will be rectified soon. Pictures will follow.
Banners placed by Melody Homes on fences surrounding the Sagebrush neighborhood have never been removed after repeated requests. Let's hope our new town government will stop looking the other way when "profit centers" violate our ordinances and enforce them as strongly as they do when trying to bully the entities they don't have jurisdiction over.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Changes
April 30, 2008
The Firestone Town Board, by a 3-2 vote, chose a replacement for Trustee Falcone, who recently moved out of town. There was no doubt in anyone's mind the new members were going to pick another staunch supporter of the St. Vrain Valley School Board (although I consider him to be level-headed and I have hope that he will be a board member who understands the grave responsibility he has been appointed to). The Times-Call said voting by the current board members was done by secret ballot. That is true at the time of the vote but the Town Clerk is supposed to keep records of which board member voted for whom. This information can be released according to the open meetings law. A board vacancy was filled in 2000 by the same procedure and the local media printed who voted for whom.
Veteran board members, Mr. Thomas and Mr. Walb, asked the new board members to slow down and consider all their options before choosing a replacement. Wasn't this the campaign platform of the new board members--talk, communicate, slow down, look at all the options, etc.? Those of us who know the new members knew full well that this was political rhetoric to help them get elected. You see, sitting down, talking and exploring options only applies to issues when others disagree with them and when they are in the minority. It is a dangerous politician who gets elected and brings a personal agenda to the table. And once they have a majority they will work at breakneck speed to reach their goals. Exploring issues, doing research, and talking only gets in their way.
The new members of the board have made it clear they support further tax increases by the SVVSD and reinstatement of the unethical impact fee on new homeowners (I guess the housing market must be robust enough in Firestone to sustain this $645 unethical impact fee). The responsible elected official does their research, examines issues, and discusses with their fellow board members before making a decision. To do otherwise or take positions without deliberate examination is totally irresponsible. But the damage has been done and the new board members have no choice but to do what they can to pay back those who worked tirelessly to get them elected--and the overwhelming majority of those people believe (many with religious fervor) you can't give the public school monopoly enough of your hard-earned tax dollars.
I studied the last 40-page mill levy override request by the SVVSD for almost 16 hours and asked the school board dozens of questions (I had to do this because the school board refused to come to our meeting if we allowed citizens to ask questions) before I made my decision on whether or not to support the tax increase. I believed a case could have been made for a tax increase of $3 million/year but to vote for that I would have had to also vote for the other 14 million wasteful dollars/year.
I truly thought the new board members would work to "build bridges"--as they have repeatedly said they were going to do (for at least a few months anyway). The new board members would do well to look into their own backyards before trying to kiss up to Longmont and the St. Vrain Valley School Board. The bridges they are now starting to burn lead directly to their neighbors. If they don't watch out burning these bridges will be a lot more serious than worrying about the bridges leading to those outside of Firestone who don't have our best interests at heart.
It's only been a short time since the swearing in of new board members and the special interests are now taking control.
Mr. Auer and Mr. Sorensen, along with Ms. Morgan, have been the most vocal and active opponents of educational choice in the Tri-Towns. Although Mr. Auer helped start a charter school, he has made it clear his school should have a monopoly on educational choice in our area. His school even went so far to be the first and only charter school to testify at the Colorado State Board of Education AGAINST the formation of another charter school (Imagine). Mr. Sorensen notified every local, state and federal agency he could find to try to find some technicality in which to stop the building of the Imagine Charter School. And Ms. Morgan just follows the wills and desires of the St. Vrain Valley School District and has been an outspoken critic of educational choice.
So what happened? Imagine Charter School erected a temporary banner near the construction of their new building. The temporary banner let people know the new school is being built and when it will open. The Town of Firestone forced them to take the banner down last week. For the 6 years I was mayor I received numerous complaints from homeowners about Coal Ridge Middle School and Prairie Ridge Elementary School and their lack of conformity to Town of Firestone regulations. Excessive weeks, dead trees, multiple portable buildings, trash on the grounds, etc. were the most common complaints. Our town attorney made it clear a municipality has no control over the use of a special district's (school district, fire district, library district, etc) property. We were told a special district could build whatever they want and do whatever they want on their property, as long as it didn't break State or Federal laws--but they didn't have to conform to a local municipality's laws.
So now we have a competing charter school to Mr. Auer's charter school--a charter school that will most likely effect the bottom financial line of his school. And now the Town of Firestone feels it has the authority to control the placement of a temporary banner when it's attorney has made it clear in the past the town can't exert control over anything else. What will be next? What do the newly elected board members have up their sleeves to stop the school from opening? The parents of over 400 children who are signed up for the school would like to know--and not at the last moment, as the SVVSD did last year.
The Firestone Town Board, by a 3-2 vote, chose a replacement for Trustee Falcone, who recently moved out of town. There was no doubt in anyone's mind the new members were going to pick another staunch supporter of the St. Vrain Valley School Board (although I consider him to be level-headed and I have hope that he will be a board member who understands the grave responsibility he has been appointed to). The Times-Call said voting by the current board members was done by secret ballot. That is true at the time of the vote but the Town Clerk is supposed to keep records of which board member voted for whom. This information can be released according to the open meetings law. A board vacancy was filled in 2000 by the same procedure and the local media printed who voted for whom.
Veteran board members, Mr. Thomas and Mr. Walb, asked the new board members to slow down and consider all their options before choosing a replacement. Wasn't this the campaign platform of the new board members--talk, communicate, slow down, look at all the options, etc.? Those of us who know the new members knew full well that this was political rhetoric to help them get elected. You see, sitting down, talking and exploring options only applies to issues when others disagree with them and when they are in the minority. It is a dangerous politician who gets elected and brings a personal agenda to the table. And once they have a majority they will work at breakneck speed to reach their goals. Exploring issues, doing research, and talking only gets in their way.
The new members of the board have made it clear they support further tax increases by the SVVSD and reinstatement of the unethical impact fee on new homeowners (I guess the housing market must be robust enough in Firestone to sustain this $645 unethical impact fee). The responsible elected official does their research, examines issues, and discusses with their fellow board members before making a decision. To do otherwise or take positions without deliberate examination is totally irresponsible. But the damage has been done and the new board members have no choice but to do what they can to pay back those who worked tirelessly to get them elected--and the overwhelming majority of those people believe (many with religious fervor) you can't give the public school monopoly enough of your hard-earned tax dollars.
I studied the last 40-page mill levy override request by the SVVSD for almost 16 hours and asked the school board dozens of questions (I had to do this because the school board refused to come to our meeting if we allowed citizens to ask questions) before I made my decision on whether or not to support the tax increase. I believed a case could have been made for a tax increase of $3 million/year but to vote for that I would have had to also vote for the other 14 million wasteful dollars/year.
I truly thought the new board members would work to "build bridges"--as they have repeatedly said they were going to do (for at least a few months anyway). The new board members would do well to look into their own backyards before trying to kiss up to Longmont and the St. Vrain Valley School Board. The bridges they are now starting to burn lead directly to their neighbors. If they don't watch out burning these bridges will be a lot more serious than worrying about the bridges leading to those outside of Firestone who don't have our best interests at heart.
It's only been a short time since the swearing in of new board members and the special interests are now taking control.
Mr. Auer and Mr. Sorensen, along with Ms. Morgan, have been the most vocal and active opponents of educational choice in the Tri-Towns. Although Mr. Auer helped start a charter school, he has made it clear his school should have a monopoly on educational choice in our area. His school even went so far to be the first and only charter school to testify at the Colorado State Board of Education AGAINST the formation of another charter school (Imagine). Mr. Sorensen notified every local, state and federal agency he could find to try to find some technicality in which to stop the building of the Imagine Charter School. And Ms. Morgan just follows the wills and desires of the St. Vrain Valley School District and has been an outspoken critic of educational choice.
So what happened? Imagine Charter School erected a temporary banner near the construction of their new building. The temporary banner let people know the new school is being built and when it will open. The Town of Firestone forced them to take the banner down last week. For the 6 years I was mayor I received numerous complaints from homeowners about Coal Ridge Middle School and Prairie Ridge Elementary School and their lack of conformity to Town of Firestone regulations. Excessive weeks, dead trees, multiple portable buildings, trash on the grounds, etc. were the most common complaints. Our town attorney made it clear a municipality has no control over the use of a special district's (school district, fire district, library district, etc) property. We were told a special district could build whatever they want and do whatever they want on their property, as long as it didn't break State or Federal laws--but they didn't have to conform to a local municipality's laws.
So now we have a competing charter school to Mr. Auer's charter school--a charter school that will most likely effect the bottom financial line of his school. And now the Town of Firestone feels it has the authority to control the placement of a temporary banner when it's attorney has made it clear in the past the town can't exert control over anything else. What will be next? What do the newly elected board members have up their sleeves to stop the school from opening? The parents of over 400 children who are signed up for the school would like to know--and not at the last moment, as the SVVSD did last year.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Post Election E-Mails
(This was a short note from someone and was greatly appreciated)
Well thank you for all your service! We have a great little community here and we appreciate all your hard work as Mayor!
(I withheld name)
I was sorry to hear that the slate of candidates that you supported were defeated. The town will have to now live with Chad Auer and his cronies which include the Longmont City Council. I don't know where Chad comes off thinking that he has to carry everything to Longmont for approval. After all, Firestone is an independent entity, although, for the next two years, at least, it will seem like it just an arm of the Longmont City Council.
I know for the past few years, you have been trying to get a .01 sales tax through on food (only if the other board members eliminated the Firestone property tax as a trade-off) and it has been turned down every time it has come up for a vote. In reading the news stories on the new town council, I think that tax will be small potatoes compared to what Firestone can expect to pay under Chad Auer's group. I can see the SVVSD levy increasing substantially, after all, they are always looking for more money, the sales tax for the town increasing to match what the other towns around have, the board pushing through a tax for the bus to come to Firestone and any other tax they can think of to pass. I know this has to go to the voters, but with the margin they won, I don't see much of a chance that they will fail with the additional taxes.
The only thing that I can be sure of is that at the end of two years, the town may be too far down the wrong road to turn back and everything you and the previous board worked for will be lost forever. It's definitely a new beginning for Firestone, only one that the residents will wish they would have never approached.
(I withheld the name)
Mike,
Just a big 'Thank You' for all YOU, and the town trustees, have done for the residents of Firestone the past six years. You have put down a good foundation that will continue for some time. I have lived here in Firestone only the past two years, so have not known about everything that has happened. But the bits and pieces I have heard I don't understand. "We have our town back"?, Where did it go? It seems to me our town was doing just fine.... Why when you are leader and accomplishing good things, do some people become jealous or something and want to tear that down?? "We need to talk (or communicate)". How long must one talk about something before the act gets done? If as you, and most of the trustees ,did have good plan of action, do you have to talk about what must be done; get on with it and get the job done. If you try to please every last person, nothing gets done.
The City of Longmont seems to talk about things a lot and never gets much done!!
I did hear about the SVSD several years before we moved here and some of there budget problems. Didn't the state treasurer have to step in at one point and bail them out?
An interesting note, after the meet the candidates sponsored by TC, I told friends my first impression of Chad Auer was that he wanted the mayors position as another 'notch for his resume'. Well, after reading notes on your blog there it was, his aspirations to be governor?
Firestone Resident (I withheld his name)
Mike,
My husband and I are often divided on political issues, but we were always unified in our support of your leadership and the actions taken by the Board during your years of service to our community. You based your focus on facts and the Trustees kept their focus on the best interest of Firestone’s residents, the job and focus for which you all took an oaths as elected officials. We would also like to thank you and the Trustees for having the foresight to look ahead to prepare Firestone for success long into the future with a plan that didn’t burden the community with debt along the way.
As for the newly elected officials, their lack of integrity was repeatedly demonstrated in the last two months by their supporters. Chad Auer’s wife resorted to sign theft, criminal vigilante behavior which Mr. Auer (not only our new Mayor, but… gulp, our new Police Commissioner) publicly condoned, and sparked rampant sign destruction and theft in the weeks that followed. And then there was the endorsements by the area Chamber’s President, Mr. Burton, in local publications. The first was made more than a month before it was known who the other candidates would be. These endorsements were clearly done in a manner intended to duped voters in to thinking they were endorsements by the whole Chamber. And then there was Mr. Burton’s letter in the Farmer & Miner which was filled with unbelievable lies and groundless character assassination. The final assault was the St. Vrain Valley School District’s involvement in our local election; incredibly inappropriate and discreditable… and business as usual for our dismal school district and their pompous Board.
To be honest, the statements recently made in the local paper by our newly elected officials already prove that our fears are not unfounded. They haven’t even been sworn in yet and they already sound eager to sellout Firestone and betray its residents to outside interests of Longmont/Boulder County and the St. Vrain Valley School District. I hope that the apathetic residents of Firestone wake up and realize the sharp turn that our town’s leadership is taking and stand up against this betrayal from within.
I realize that you’ve only known a couple of the Firestone First candidates for a couple months, but I sincerely hope that you encourage all of those candidates to join you in voicing their opinions loudly and frequently over the next two years. I also hope that they will be willing to run in the next election. At that point we will again be looking at the Mayor’s seat and three Trustee positions up for grabs. Considering the dark cloud that came over Firestone on April 1st, I don’t think that we can start planning too soon to bring real leadership back to Firestone. For now I just pray that the new slate that used lies and deception to get elected don’t do too much irreversible damage over the next two years.
Most sincerely,
(I withheld their names)
Hi Mr. Simone:
I was so disgusted with the way your opponents ran their campaigns. The nastiness and slander from those elected is despicable. Mark my words: Firestone will regret voting Auer in as mayor.
Mr. Simone: as a leader one sometimes has to take a stand for something one believes in knowing all along it will not make everyone happy. You made that stand, and with it upset people that do not know how to compromise. So, they went after Jason and Lane with a vengeance while using you as the red herring.
As Mayor, you were a visionary and believed in the citizens of Firestone. You came to my home when you campaigned last and visited for over half an hour with my wife and I. Jason did the same last week as well as Lane. There is no evidence that any of the candidates that were elected on Tuesday came into my neighborhood (Eagle Crest). I guess they don't see people who live in nice modular homes as citizens. But, you did. Jason did and Lane did as well.
As mayor you were smart to bring business into our community knowing the housing market was headed to a deep freeze. Foreclosures do not pay taxes but businesses will in any economy. Firestone has American Furniture with more pertinent businesses on the way thanks to you. Auer didn’t accomplish that and he never will come close.
You were completely original in developing the town ordinance requiring the town board to save for future infrastructure costs. How many cities, small or large, think along those lines? Not too many. I don’t see Auer smart enough to come up with similar ideas. Instead, he’ll just sell our community to the nearest towns and tax us to do it.
The nastiness of Auer and his henchmen during his campaign was an embarrassment to our community. The lies coming from the St. Vrain School board about not being involved with our elections is shameful. And, some of them were campaigning here on election day. That’s outrageous because at least one isn’t even a citizen of our town.
I wish you all the luck in your new role as citizen. Thanks for all the hard work you gave for our town. God help us now that you’re gone and Jason is not leading us.
Regards,
Bob R. (Last name withheld for obvious reasons)
Firestone, CO
Nice to see a city official - heck a CITIZEN - with a spine.
The blatant singling out of these people (4c, Lifebridge, etc.) makes my blood boil.
O.C.K--Longmont
Mr. Mayor,
I also want you to know how much I have appreciated your efforts on behalf of educational choice. I wish we were in a better school district and with little monsters of my own in and coming into the education marketplace.
Thanks again,
XXX
Mike, I had to let you know that xxxx & I are going to miss your leadership here in the town of Firestone. You and the Board have done a lot of great things for this community. We just wish that it could be continued however we are afraid that with the new regime all of the great things you folks did and all you have on the table will not come to a crashing halt. We fear that the annexations will not come to pass now, and we will turn into the Third Boulder, God forbid, but the writing seems to be on the wall. The apathy shown in this election mirrors that of Longmont residents and see what that got them. Again we want to thank you for all you great work, we really do appreciate it. Hopefully it will not be all for not. Your friends, xxx & xxxx xxxxxx. (I withheld their names)
Well thank you for all your service! We have a great little community here and we appreciate all your hard work as Mayor!
(I withheld name)
I was sorry to hear that the slate of candidates that you supported were defeated. The town will have to now live with Chad Auer and his cronies which include the Longmont City Council. I don't know where Chad comes off thinking that he has to carry everything to Longmont for approval. After all, Firestone is an independent entity, although, for the next two years, at least, it will seem like it just an arm of the Longmont City Council.
I know for the past few years, you have been trying to get a .01 sales tax through on food (only if the other board members eliminated the Firestone property tax as a trade-off) and it has been turned down every time it has come up for a vote. In reading the news stories on the new town council, I think that tax will be small potatoes compared to what Firestone can expect to pay under Chad Auer's group. I can see the SVVSD levy increasing substantially, after all, they are always looking for more money, the sales tax for the town increasing to match what the other towns around have, the board pushing through a tax for the bus to come to Firestone and any other tax they can think of to pass. I know this has to go to the voters, but with the margin they won, I don't see much of a chance that they will fail with the additional taxes.
The only thing that I can be sure of is that at the end of two years, the town may be too far down the wrong road to turn back and everything you and the previous board worked for will be lost forever. It's definitely a new beginning for Firestone, only one that the residents will wish they would have never approached.
(I withheld the name)
Mike,
Just a big 'Thank You' for all YOU, and the town trustees, have done for the residents of Firestone the past six years. You have put down a good foundation that will continue for some time. I have lived here in Firestone only the past two years, so have not known about everything that has happened. But the bits and pieces I have heard I don't understand. "We have our town back"?, Where did it go? It seems to me our town was doing just fine.... Why when you are leader and accomplishing good things, do some people become jealous or something and want to tear that down?? "We need to talk (or communicate)". How long must one talk about something before the act gets done? If as you, and most of the trustees ,did have good plan of action, do you have to talk about what must be done; get on with it and get the job done. If you try to please every last person, nothing gets done.
The City of Longmont seems to talk about things a lot and never gets much done!!
I did hear about the SVSD several years before we moved here and some of there budget problems. Didn't the state treasurer have to step in at one point and bail them out?
An interesting note, after the meet the candidates sponsored by TC, I told friends my first impression of Chad Auer was that he wanted the mayors position as another 'notch for his resume'. Well, after reading notes on your blog there it was, his aspirations to be governor?
Firestone Resident (I withheld his name)
Mike,
My husband and I are often divided on political issues, but we were always unified in our support of your leadership and the actions taken by the Board during your years of service to our community. You based your focus on facts and the Trustees kept their focus on the best interest of Firestone’s residents, the job and focus for which you all took an oaths as elected officials. We would also like to thank you and the Trustees for having the foresight to look ahead to prepare Firestone for success long into the future with a plan that didn’t burden the community with debt along the way.
As for the newly elected officials, their lack of integrity was repeatedly demonstrated in the last two months by their supporters. Chad Auer’s wife resorted to sign theft, criminal vigilante behavior which Mr. Auer (not only our new Mayor, but… gulp, our new Police Commissioner) publicly condoned, and sparked rampant sign destruction and theft in the weeks that followed. And then there was the endorsements by the area Chamber’s President, Mr. Burton, in local publications. The first was made more than a month before it was known who the other candidates would be. These endorsements were clearly done in a manner intended to duped voters in to thinking they were endorsements by the whole Chamber. And then there was Mr. Burton’s letter in the Farmer & Miner which was filled with unbelievable lies and groundless character assassination. The final assault was the St. Vrain Valley School District’s involvement in our local election; incredibly inappropriate and discreditable… and business as usual for our dismal school district and their pompous Board.
To be honest, the statements recently made in the local paper by our newly elected officials already prove that our fears are not unfounded. They haven’t even been sworn in yet and they already sound eager to sellout Firestone and betray its residents to outside interests of Longmont/Boulder County and the St. Vrain Valley School District. I hope that the apathetic residents of Firestone wake up and realize the sharp turn that our town’s leadership is taking and stand up against this betrayal from within.
I realize that you’ve only known a couple of the Firestone First candidates for a couple months, but I sincerely hope that you encourage all of those candidates to join you in voicing their opinions loudly and frequently over the next two years. I also hope that they will be willing to run in the next election. At that point we will again be looking at the Mayor’s seat and three Trustee positions up for grabs. Considering the dark cloud that came over Firestone on April 1st, I don’t think that we can start planning too soon to bring real leadership back to Firestone. For now I just pray that the new slate that used lies and deception to get elected don’t do too much irreversible damage over the next two years.
Most sincerely,
(I withheld their names)
Hi Mr. Simone:
I was so disgusted with the way your opponents ran their campaigns. The nastiness and slander from those elected is despicable. Mark my words: Firestone will regret voting Auer in as mayor.
Mr. Simone: as a leader one sometimes has to take a stand for something one believes in knowing all along it will not make everyone happy. You made that stand, and with it upset people that do not know how to compromise. So, they went after Jason and Lane with a vengeance while using you as the red herring.
As Mayor, you were a visionary and believed in the citizens of Firestone. You came to my home when you campaigned last and visited for over half an hour with my wife and I. Jason did the same last week as well as Lane. There is no evidence that any of the candidates that were elected on Tuesday came into my neighborhood (Eagle Crest). I guess they don't see people who live in nice modular homes as citizens. But, you did. Jason did and Lane did as well.
As mayor you were smart to bring business into our community knowing the housing market was headed to a deep freeze. Foreclosures do not pay taxes but businesses will in any economy. Firestone has American Furniture with more pertinent businesses on the way thanks to you. Auer didn’t accomplish that and he never will come close.
You were completely original in developing the town ordinance requiring the town board to save for future infrastructure costs. How many cities, small or large, think along those lines? Not too many. I don’t see Auer smart enough to come up with similar ideas. Instead, he’ll just sell our community to the nearest towns and tax us to do it.
The nastiness of Auer and his henchmen during his campaign was an embarrassment to our community. The lies coming from the St. Vrain School board about not being involved with our elections is shameful. And, some of them were campaigning here on election day. That’s outrageous because at least one isn’t even a citizen of our town.
I wish you all the luck in your new role as citizen. Thanks for all the hard work you gave for our town. God help us now that you’re gone and Jason is not leading us.
Regards,
Bob R. (Last name withheld for obvious reasons)
Firestone, CO
Nice to see a city official - heck a CITIZEN - with a spine.
The blatant singling out of these people (4c, Lifebridge, etc.) makes my blood boil.
O.C.K--Longmont
Mr. Mayor,
I also want you to know how much I have appreciated your efforts on behalf of educational choice. I wish we were in a better school district and with little monsters of my own in and coming into the education marketplace.
Thanks again,
XXX
Mike, I had to let you know that xxxx & I are going to miss your leadership here in the town of Firestone. You and the Board have done a lot of great things for this community. We just wish that it could be continued however we are afraid that with the new regime all of the great things you folks did and all you have on the table will not come to a crashing halt. We fear that the annexations will not come to pass now, and we will turn into the Third Boulder, God forbid, but the writing seems to be on the wall. The apathy shown in this election mirrors that of Longmont residents and see what that got them. Again we want to thank you for all you great work, we really do appreciate it. Hopefully it will not be all for not. Your friends, xxx & xxxx xxxxxx. (I withheld their names)
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Longmont's Annexation Scheme
Firestone lets Longmont know 5 months ago it is considering changing its master plan.
Longmont has a "retreat" in February when they know the TV cameras won't be present and reporters generally leave them alone and allow privacy. The Anti-LifeBridge newly elected City Council majority develops a scheme to stop the church at all costs.
Firestone trods along, with everything being done by the book and in the light of day.
The anti-LifeBridge council members have the mayor write a letter to Firestone's mayor asking him to slow down, sit down, and communicate. The plan was to put public pressure on Firestone's Board to postpone action so Longmont could play out its "secret" scheme. No mention in that letter of the scheme. Longmont waited to release their city council agenda until late on Good Friday, the beginning of one of the holiest Christian weekends, to prove their lack of good faith. So much for open communication.
Coincidentally, I'm told by a Longmont resident (after the letter was published in the local paper) the only reason for Mayor Lange's letter was to get us to delay so they could annex the road. I guess he was right.
Here is a passage from the Longmont Times-Call's story concerning the March 25, 2008 Longmont City Council meeting:
Longmont City Council members didn’t discuss the issue before they voted unanimously to annex land in hopes of foiling Firestone’s plans to extend its town limits to Longmont’s eastern border.
Why were they afraid to discuss the issue? Why didn't they just echo what they said at their retreat when the TV cameras weren't running? Could it be there was no ethical or moral ground on which they could stand?
It’s not good enough for the anti-religious majority on the Longmont City Council to kick a church out of their city but now they want to keep them from exercising their first amendment right to freely practice their religion. The City Council “separated” the church from the “state” but apparently they want more. Now they want to make sure nobody else can have them either. It reminds me of a couple that gets divorced, yet one spouse will do whatever they need to do, including lethal force, to keep their former spouse from joining with someone else.
Check out http://www.longmontreport.typepad.com to learn more about the political changes in Longmont (You will need to copy and paste this link into your browser window--the hyperlink feature is not working properly)
6 candidates running for Firestone's Town Board (the "Longmont First" group) echo the call by the anti-LifeBridge Longmont City Council and the Longmont Times-Call's editorial board to slow down, sit down, and communicate. Their inexperience and naivety plays into the hands of the Longmont City Council and the editorial board of the Longmont Times-Call and shows they are not ready for "Prime Time".
I think it is safe to say a line has finally been crossed in Longmont's politics and they can officially start merger negotiations with the city of Boulder.
The Big Question? How are we going to get Boulder County out of our local politics?
Longmont has a "retreat" in February when they know the TV cameras won't be present and reporters generally leave them alone and allow privacy. The Anti-LifeBridge newly elected City Council majority develops a scheme to stop the church at all costs.
Firestone trods along, with everything being done by the book and in the light of day.
The anti-LifeBridge council members have the mayor write a letter to Firestone's mayor asking him to slow down, sit down, and communicate. The plan was to put public pressure on Firestone's Board to postpone action so Longmont could play out its "secret" scheme. No mention in that letter of the scheme. Longmont waited to release their city council agenda until late on Good Friday, the beginning of one of the holiest Christian weekends, to prove their lack of good faith. So much for open communication.
Coincidentally, I'm told by a Longmont resident (after the letter was published in the local paper) the only reason for Mayor Lange's letter was to get us to delay so they could annex the road. I guess he was right.
Here is a passage from the Longmont Times-Call's story concerning the March 25, 2008 Longmont City Council meeting:
Longmont City Council members didn’t discuss the issue before they voted unanimously to annex land in hopes of foiling Firestone’s plans to extend its town limits to Longmont’s eastern border.
Why were they afraid to discuss the issue? Why didn't they just echo what they said at their retreat when the TV cameras weren't running? Could it be there was no ethical or moral ground on which they could stand?
It’s not good enough for the anti-religious majority on the Longmont City Council to kick a church out of their city but now they want to keep them from exercising their first amendment right to freely practice their religion. The City Council “separated” the church from the “state” but apparently they want more. Now they want to make sure nobody else can have them either. It reminds me of a couple that gets divorced, yet one spouse will do whatever they need to do, including lethal force, to keep their former spouse from joining with someone else.
Check out http://www.longmontreport.typepad.com to learn more about the political changes in Longmont (You will need to copy and paste this link into your browser window--the hyperlink feature is not working properly)
6 candidates running for Firestone's Town Board (the "Longmont First" group) echo the call by the anti-LifeBridge Longmont City Council and the Longmont Times-Call's editorial board to slow down, sit down, and communicate. Their inexperience and naivety plays into the hands of the Longmont City Council and the editorial board of the Longmont Times-Call and shows they are not ready for "Prime Time".
I think it is safe to say a line has finally been crossed in Longmont's politics and they can officially start merger negotiations with the city of Boulder.
The Big Question? How are we going to get Boulder County out of our local politics?
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Carbon Valley Chamber of Commerce Endoses Candidates
The Carbon Valley Chamber of Commerce's Board of Directors (without other member's being notified) endorsed candidates for Firestone's municipal election. The Board of Directors is made up of only one Firestone resident (out of 8 members). "President For Life" Steve Burton endorsed a mayoral candidate well before the campaign began. So much for meeting the potential leaders of the community, asking them questions, and attending candidate's gatherings before making a decision.
It does appear there are many people who don't live in Firestone who want to impact our elections. It's time to stand up to these people and tell them to stay out of our politics. Mr. Burton and his board supported the sales tax increase and food tax in Firestone and worked hard to get it passed. Steve Curtis and myself were the only leaders to speak out against this tax increase. The "Firestone First" group have signed a pledge not to raise your taxes. If Steve Burton, the SVVSD, Mayor Doering of Frederick, the Longmont City Council and the Longmont Times-Call get their way and Mr. Auer and his "Longmont First" group get elected, you will be taxed, taxed, and taxed again.
The following letter was sent to the Carbon Valley Chamber of Commerce by one of its members:
Carbon Valley Chamber Board,
I am writing in regards to “Chamber endorses Auer, Foster, Holcomb, Sorenson” which ran in today’s Carbon Valley Edition of the Daily Times- Call. After seeing the Chamber’s President, Steve Burton, state an endorsement in the newspaper in January for a candidate running for mayor of Firestone more than a month before the election packets were made available at Firestone’s town hall, I can’t say that I was too surprised. So, how is it that the Chamber President can determine who the most qualified or business friendly candidate is before he even know who’s running, or was it just a foregone conclusion that the Chamber was going to endorse the Principal of the school that the Chamber President’s children attend?
I strongly suggest that you make all of the Chamber members aware that the Chamber Board has taken this public action. Those who don’t live in the Carbon Valley circulation area or who don’t receive the Times-Call are as yet unaware that this endorsement was made, but it could directly impact their businesses when they are faced with Firestone residents that disagree with the Chamber Board’s endorsements.
As a member of the Carbon Valley Chamber, I was incredibly disappointed by the Board’s decision to endorse any candidates in the upcoming Firestone election, or that you would try to influence any town’s local election in this manner especially without the knowledge or input of your membership. Your actions will likely have a direct negative impact on the businesses of your Chamber members, especially those in Firestone. Customers that believe the headline as stated and disagree with that endorsement will likely take their business elsewhere. You are definitely not fulfilling your primary function which is to have a positive impact on your membership’s businesses.
Additionally, the vast majority of the Chamber Board members who unilaterally made this decision for your membership are not even residents of Firestone. Your actions appear to demonstrate a personal interest in attempting to influence the outcome of another town’s local government election that you don’t have the right to vote in. I don’t see how this endorsement will benefit the Chamber membership. In this instance, the actions of the Chamber Board were simply unethical. If you want to have a say in Firestone’s elections than move to Firestone and register to vote. Many of your members have that right because they are residents of Firestone just as I am, and many of us now feel that the Chamber has violated our rights.
I recommend that the Chamber post information regarding your political interests on your website and reference all current and future members to that information. Additionally, if you are going to function as a political body I recommend that all future Board candidates be required to disclose their political party affiliation and place of residence so that the Chamber membership can make an informed decision. As you have chosen to function as a political organization promoting a biased and unsolicited agenda without providing your members a voice in that process rather than an organization promoting community businesses, I respectfully withdraw my business’s membership to this Chamber effective immediately.
Regards,
Wendy W. Richards
It does appear there are many people who don't live in Firestone who want to impact our elections. It's time to stand up to these people and tell them to stay out of our politics. Mr. Burton and his board supported the sales tax increase and food tax in Firestone and worked hard to get it passed. Steve Curtis and myself were the only leaders to speak out against this tax increase. The "Firestone First" group have signed a pledge not to raise your taxes. If Steve Burton, the SVVSD, Mayor Doering of Frederick, the Longmont City Council and the Longmont Times-Call get their way and Mr. Auer and his "Longmont First" group get elected, you will be taxed, taxed, and taxed again.
The following letter was sent to the Carbon Valley Chamber of Commerce by one of its members:
Carbon Valley Chamber Board,
I am writing in regards to “Chamber endorses Auer, Foster, Holcomb, Sorenson” which ran in today’s Carbon Valley Edition of the Daily Times- Call. After seeing the Chamber’s President, Steve Burton, state an endorsement in the newspaper in January for a candidate running for mayor of Firestone more than a month before the election packets were made available at Firestone’s town hall, I can’t say that I was too surprised. So, how is it that the Chamber President can determine who the most qualified or business friendly candidate is before he even know who’s running, or was it just a foregone conclusion that the Chamber was going to endorse the Principal of the school that the Chamber President’s children attend?
I strongly suggest that you make all of the Chamber members aware that the Chamber Board has taken this public action. Those who don’t live in the Carbon Valley circulation area or who don’t receive the Times-Call are as yet unaware that this endorsement was made, but it could directly impact their businesses when they are faced with Firestone residents that disagree with the Chamber Board’s endorsements.
As a member of the Carbon Valley Chamber, I was incredibly disappointed by the Board’s decision to endorse any candidates in the upcoming Firestone election, or that you would try to influence any town’s local election in this manner especially without the knowledge or input of your membership. Your actions will likely have a direct negative impact on the businesses of your Chamber members, especially those in Firestone. Customers that believe the headline as stated and disagree with that endorsement will likely take their business elsewhere. You are definitely not fulfilling your primary function which is to have a positive impact on your membership’s businesses.
Additionally, the vast majority of the Chamber Board members who unilaterally made this decision for your membership are not even residents of Firestone. Your actions appear to demonstrate a personal interest in attempting to influence the outcome of another town’s local government election that you don’t have the right to vote in. I don’t see how this endorsement will benefit the Chamber membership. In this instance, the actions of the Chamber Board were simply unethical. If you want to have a say in Firestone’s elections than move to Firestone and register to vote. Many of your members have that right because they are residents of Firestone just as I am, and many of us now feel that the Chamber has violated our rights.
I recommend that the Chamber post information regarding your political interests on your website and reference all current and future members to that information. Additionally, if you are going to function as a political body I recommend that all future Board candidates be required to disclose their political party affiliation and place of residence so that the Chamber membership can make an informed decision. As you have chosen to function as a political organization promoting a biased and unsolicited agenda without providing your members a voice in that process rather than an organization promoting community businesses, I respectfully withdraw my business’s membership to this Chamber effective immediately.
Regards,
Wendy W. Richards
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Firestone's New Name? East Longmont
Below is the Times-Call main editorial for 3-11-08. I'll make comments in the body of the editorial and at the end. They are in italics. Want to see what a Longmont resident thinks about Firestone? Click the link below.
http://denver.yourhub.com/Longmont/Stories/Business/New-Businesses/Story~439503.aspx
Times-Call Editorials
Publish Date: 3/11/2008
On leadership and land grabs
Firestone’s move to snag 74 acres on Longmont’s eastern border is a shock. It’s not a surprise. (no, it's not a surprise--our board has been consistent in calling for towns and cities in this area to expand their master plans so they have adjacent borders, effectively leaving urban development to the municipalities and not Weld County. Longmont decided not to participate in the Weld County Partnership group--a group dedicated to dealing with the problem of uncontrolled urban development by Weld County) After all, Firestone’s the town whose leaders held school district money for ransom last year (the money was not the school district's but was unethically extorted from new homeowners by bullying municipalities into serving as their middle men). The town caved and coughed up $186,000 in development fees to the St. Vrain Valley School District after the district threatened to sue. Then town leaders threw a tantrum and decided to no longer collect $645 per house from developers whose homes help overfill the schools. (again, unethical and possibly illegal extortion of money from new homeowners by trying to work around the Colorado Supreme Court's decision that school districts cannot mandate impact fees) Now Firestone’s up to new tricks. They’re working to crash Longmont’s eastern gates, even after Longmont and Boulder County spent millions preserving land east of Longmont. (Longmont and Boulder County has and has had the ability to buy whatever land it wants for a buffer. Firestone has never annexed any property whose property owners didn't ask to be annexed. Testimony in front of Firestone's Planning Commission and e-mails I've received from current property owners appear to make a case that Longmont has held its neighboring property owners hostage by not giving them a hearing--essentially "taking" their property to maintain a "free" buffer.) Firestone made a plan to reach down Colo. Highway 119, almost to the Boulder County line, and annex the 74-acre Fairview Estates property. (Firestone began reevaluating its current master plan well before Firestone was aware of Fairview or LifeBridge Christian Church. Our reevaluation began when Weld County approved almost 4000 homes on our northern border. Firestone never "made a plan" to annex Fairview Estates. They came to us and asked us to annex them) Coincidentally, the Fairview property would make a terrific stepping stone if Firestone wanted to grab (Firestone has never "grabbed" anything whose owners didn't ask to be "grabbed") LifeBridge Christian Church’s Union development next door. LifeBridge, you’ll recall, walked away from Longmont after the Union annexation was set to go before voters. (LifeBridge was forced to "walk away" by the election of an anti-religious faction to the Longmont City Council.) Establishing clear boundaries around municipalities is a useful practice. It helps give each an identity and preserves land on the periphery.(The only way you can ethically "preserve land" on your periphery is to buy it) Longmont attempted to create a buffer to the east. Firestone decided it didn’t care. (Firestone also thought there was a buffer around its town but Weld County's current policy eliminated that possibility. Firestone understands to create a buffer it will have to buy property or property rights. Longmont is naive if it thinks it can create "free" buffers in Weld County.) That’s typical of the Firestone leaders’ Wild West approach to intergovernmental relations.(This is an interesting comment. It seems to echo Mr. Auer and his "Longmont First" slate of candidate's ill informed and incorrect comments about intergovernmental relations. I guess this is a continuation of the T-C's biennial attempt to influence Firestone's elections by now trying to prop up and give legitimacy to Mr. Auer and his "Longmont First" slate of candidates .) Does Firestone want a reputation for being a rogue town that bends over backwards to snatch land from its neighbors? (Very misleading T-C. Nobody is "snatching" anything. Frederick and Longmont have changed their master plans and annexed property outside their growth boundaries. Firestone is considering doing the same. You can't "snatch" property that you don't own. Longmont may think they "own" property outside their borders but I suspect the affected property owners think differently) That uses development fees as a bargaining chip instead of using them to improve the schools that serve its children? (the school board is a governmental agency with the power to tax its residents. Instead of trying to work around your voters by trying to impose unethical impact fees, ask your voters for a tax increase. If you can't justify it to the voters, you don't deserve it.) We hope Firestone residents will consider that question when they consider who should fill four open seats on the board on April 1. (The T-C's attempt to affect Firestone's election continues again this year--but of course they will try to make you believe they are an "unbiased" journalistic entity.) So there you have it in one editorial. A Boulder County media outlet doing what they can to convince the voters in Firestone to allow a Boulder County school board (whose representative John Poyton has been meeting and discussing strategy with Chad Auer and his "Longmont First" slate of candidates for months) along with the newly elected Longmont City Council to run our town. Check out the other article on this blog concerning the Times-Call's "unbiased" dealings with Firestone. If certain people get elected April 1st, I expect their first order of business is to vote on a name change for Firestone.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Chronology of Issues Concerning the St. Vrain Valley School District
The following are comments I have made concerning the Town of Firestone's dealings with the St. Vrain Valley School District (SVVSD)--with the earliest comments shown first.
The following refers to the almost $14 million deficit the SVVSD still hasn't adequately explained to the public and the Town Board's request for the school board to resign:
Hi Everyone,
I would first like to clarify a headline appearing in the Longmont Times-Call this morning--this is not a recall effort as the headline stated. We are asking the board to voluntarily resign and allow a new group of individuals to regain the trust and confidence of the taxpayers.
What we are doing tonight is sharing with you the opinion of the board that expresses our displeasure with the school district. It is not a legally binding document and has no legal authority with the school board.
This has not been an easy decision by the board of trustees and we know a few of you will not agree with our action. We feel to do nothing, in essence, is agreeing with the actions the school board has taken--and we don't agree with their actions.
Economic impact--people don't move to an area because they have poor schools. They move because the teachers are good, there is effective leadership, and there is a strong physical plant. We feel the school board has failed in their responsibility concerning the last two points. Firestone is in the beginning stages of attracting much needed new business to our area. We feel the school district situation will negatively impact that development, i.e. possibly slow down residential and commercial construction. If this occurs we will have to ask the voters of our town to support property tax increases in the coming years.
We are concerned the schools so desperately needed in the Tri-Towns are going to be built on time and with money available to staff the elementary school. We have the most crucial need for new schools in the district.
Replacing school board members would enhance any chances the district has of asking taxpayers for additional funding to help us out of this mess. Members of the school board have said the district has virtually no chance of asking for a mill levy increase approved by the voters in the near future. This may not be the case with a completely new board.
We don't feel the current school board should be involved in the budget process for next year.
We don't want to give the impression the school board isn't a hard working group of individuals who haven't had the education of our children as a top priority. They have lost the trust of our board and we feel this makes them ineffective and a detriment to our future.
We appreciate the willingness of the school board to stay in office and try to work out the current financial disaster but we don't see how they can do this effectively and with community support at this point. If a new school board was elected I'm sure the current members would continue to volunteer their time to help the new board members through the transition.
After these comments the Town Board unanimously passed a resolution asking the St. Vrain Valley School Board to resign.
The following was a letter to the editor that I submitted in 2004 concerning the Coal Ridge Middle School:
To The Editor:A simple thank you would suffice. Good manners go hand with hand with good education. Wouldn’t it be nice if the school board adopted this philosophy and set a good example for the children of the St. Vrain Valley Schools?
During the recent dedication ceremony of the new Coal Ridge Middle School in Firestone, school officials recognized several organizations and local businesses for their contributions. However, in yet another glaring omission, the district failed to thank the residents of Firestone—who generously donated thousands of dollars to help make this beautiful school a reality.
To ignore the many contributions that Firestone residents continue to make to this school district is just another “slap in the face” to our citizens. The school board seems to have learned nothing from their numerous failures over the past several years.
The Town of Firestone donated the land for Coal Ridge to the school district, saving the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars. As part of the deal to receive this property four years ago, the town re-zoned adjacent commercial property, depriving the residents of Firestone of potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in future commercial property taxes. Did the residents of Firestone receive a simple thank you? No.
Firestone citizens donated a portion of their parkland to the school district so they could build a road from Colorado Blvd. to the school. Again, the citizens of Firestone saved the school district thousands of dollars. But did our residents receive a thank you? No.
Firestone paid thousands more for a stoplight on Colorado Blvd. making it safer for students entering and exiting the school. A simple thank you? Of course not.
Firestone donated another piece of parkland and built a parking lot to alleviate an unsafe condition at the Prairie Ridge Elementary School. Once again, thousands of dollars donated to the school district by Firestone residents without a thank you.
There are successes that deserve mention. I would like to thank the school board for listening to the residents of homes next to Coal Ridge and moving the parking lot away from their fences. I also thank the board for approving a charter school in the Tri-Towns because when it comes to their children’s education, parents deserve as many options as possible. Lastly, I want to congratulate the school board and teachers for a second straight year of improved CSAP scores. This is commendable in light of the financial constraints in which the school district continues to operate.
To The Editor:
Assigning blame for 3A’s failure continues. Comments have focused on the stupidity, vindictiveness, and cold-heartedness of the majority who voted against the proposal. It’s generally accepted informed voters show up in higher numbers during off-year elections.
Why did 3A fail? Here are just a few of my opinions why the school board couldn’t make their case:
--They admitted there was no legal constraint limiting spending of an extra $17+ million/year, other than none was to be spent on “Central Administration”.
--No evidence was provided to show lowering the student/teacher ratio below the current 17.7:1 (the federal government’s goal is 18:1), at a cost of over $4 million/year, would improve achievement scores.
--There was no response to the overwhelming research illustrating a lack of correlation between achievement scores and the amount of money spent, per pupil, on education.
--The board admitted teacher attrition had remained stable since the fiscal crisis was exposed, questioning the need for $3.5 million/year, or a 4% salary increase (on top of the 5.4% increase already approved), so the “teacher retention rate will increase”.
--Over $.5 million/year to hire math tutors to assist elementary school teachers unqualified to teach math?
--The school board mentioned they had a group looking into the efficiency of the district yet didn’t provide any results of their findings.
--Lack of trust continues to be an issue. It doesn’t help when the school board refuses to submit to questions from the public. Firestone offered such a venue but the school board declined. Leaders of the town were forced to ask questions on behalf of its citizens.
The Town of Firestone was the only municipality in the district, I’m aware of, who didn’t pass a resolution supporting 3A--instead letting voters decide for themselves how they should vote.
Assigning blame is counterproductive. Equally counterproductive are comments that because one doesn’t vote for a massive school tax increase, they must not support public education. I know many people who didn’t support the mill-levy override that have volunteered countless hours and thousands of dollars to make our local schools better. Questioning their dedication to our schools, because they chose not to vote for 3A, is shameful. Addressing reasons why people didn’t vote for 3A, and genuinely listening to the voters, might be a better approach in the future for our school board.
Michael P. Simone
Mayor
Town of Firestone
The next article was written just before the election in 2006.
How To Manufacture A Crisis 101
First, identify your target. Who can you blame for all your ills? Let’s use the Firestone Town Board. They are the evil ones who didn’t support 2 tax increases for the local school district (although they didn’t oppose them either).
Next, identify your issue. It must be something emotionally charged and scary and must be so frightening we could use it to try to influence an election of the town’s leaders. What about not having a full-time police officer in a middle school? What about scaring parents into thinking their children are in danger?
Now we need some help. Why don’t we send a few e-mails to the media and have a sympathetic reporter write some stories? Why don’t we send a few people to a town board meeting and personally attack the board for placing our children in harms way. Let’s specifically attack a board member who chooses to home-school his 6 children. He certainly couldn’t care about the education or safety of the town’s children (Although using that logic, a neurosurgeon wouldn’t be qualified to do brain surgery unless he had had a lobotomy himself and how could a school board member who has a child in a Longmont school possibly care about a Coal Ridge student?). We must now dissect every word a board member says and see if there is anything we could possibly use to attain our goal of manipulating an election. Just for an example let’s say the mayor says, after one of his board members has been violently and relentlessly attacked because the board member chooses to home-school his children, that maybe that board member doesn’t feel the schools are adequate enough for his children. Now, let’s spin it to say the mayor thinks the schools are terrible. That will surely get the people riled up.
In some cases the above strategy might just work but one must be prepared for flies in the ointment.
My advice is to choose your reporter well. One you think may be sympathetic could actually investigate your story and find the very middle school you are using to try to further your goals is, in fact, the middle school in the school district with the highest police presence. That reporter may find that no middle school in the district has a full-time police officer, Longmont’s 6 middle schools share one officer, Mead doesn’t have an officer, and the charter middle and high school don’t have an officer either. The reporter may also report the Town of Firestone has a minimum of 3-4 police walkthroughs every school day.
Once the facts have been published you must prepare to eat crow and admit there is no safety issue in the targeted middle school. You have to be prepared for parents’ comments questioning why a school housing 11 to 13 year-olds in a suburban environment would need a full-time armed police officer. Now you have to find something else on which to hang your “personal agenda” hat. Your credibility may now an issue and you now know the sky can only fall so many times.
The following are my comments to the St. Vrain Valley School Board concerning the Imagine Charter School at Firestone:
We currently have 3 elementary schools in the Tri-Towns that are overcrowded by 254 students. By 2010, according to the district’s long range planning committee, we will be overcrowded by 574 students at just Praire Ridge Elementary and Coal Ridge middle schools. The committee also predicts from 550 to 800 new students per year for the next 5 years (and they say it could be as high as 1000 as we come out of the current housing slump). The highest percentage of these new students will come from outside the City of
The Imagine Charter can hold 750 students. Add this to the over 300 students at Carbon Valley Academy and you reduce the burden on the school district to build schools to house over 1000 students. The district can expect to save over $20 million is construction costs if they had to house these students.
Let us help you. This school is a win-win for everybody. The parents in our area want this school, we can help you mitigate overcrowding, the Core Knowledge curriculum is popular, we have a company who will build a new school without requiring a vote for funds from the taxpayers, we have a professional non-profit company to help us get this school up and running, who the founding board has investigated, and along with other parents, have asked hundreds of tough questions they have answered to our satisfaction, the Town of Firestone who supports this school, and a group of the most dedicated parents I have seen in my over 6 years in public service who want to work with the school board to provide the best education we can for our students. Please give this application your most serious consideration. Thank you very much.
Lastly here is an editorial addressing the handling of the public charter school by the SVVSD and The Daily Times-Call:
The ill-informed editorial “St. Vrain decision on Imagine should be final word” is an excellent example of a misstatement of the facts regarding this issue. The District hasn’t negotiated in good-faith from the day Imagine School’s application was filed. Here are the facts:
Internal e-mails from School District staff recommended Imagine School be approved and Elementary School #25 postponed until needed, saving the taxpayers millions of dollars.
According to the Daily Times-Call “A failure to agree on a plan to recruit a student population that reflects the demographics and racial diversity of the community” is the “main sticking point”. However, the fact is that the parents of Imagine are committed to encouraging diversity in the charter school; offering, among other things, to hold informational meetings at Tri-Town schools, work with the District to mail information to prospective students, provide shuttle busses from current schools to the charter school so low income students could have transportation, provide Spanish translators and materials in Spanish—all rejected by the School Board.
The Charter School Act asks for a public charter school to place an emphasis on “low-achieving” students. The School Board wants to impose illegal financial penalties if 31% or more of the students attending the public charter school aren’t in the free and reduced lunch (FRL) category, making the assumption that students from low-income homes are not very bright. In addition, if that quota was not met for two consecutive semesters the District would then revoke the charter agreement, effectively closing the public charter school. This absurd requirement has never been levied against any school in any district and shows how deep the St. Vrain Valley School District’s (SVVSD) disdain for educational choice goes.
At one public hearing the SVVSD asked the charter school to set seats aside--another illegal request--for those with Hispanic surnames—again, making the assumption that those of Hispanic descent are less intelligent by virtue of their last name. Two-thirds of the schools in the district don’t have 31% FRL students but the Board demands this requirement for the public charter school and wants to impose it on all public charter schools in the District. Niwot Elementary school’s FRL student population is 3%. Is the School Board ready to impose 1970’s style busing throughout the district to make sure all schools have 31% FRL students? To impose this quota as a standard only on public charter schools rather than all schools throughout the District is blatant discrimination.
Carbon Valley Academy (CVA) opened in 2005 and became a sanctuary for parents whose children were not receiving the education they needed from other Tri-Town public schools. Only 7.6% of CVA’s students fall into the FRL category although they have the highest percentage of “low-achieving” students in the Tri-Towns based on CSAP scores. If the School Board can impose an illegal quota of 31% FRL students, CVA will have to kick out the very students the Charter School Act was designed to help.
There are four public charters in one of the largest school districts in the state—one reason the Daily Times-Call gave to deny the new public charter school. Every school is full, has a waiting list, and saves the taxpayers of the District millions in operating and construction costs. The last figures I saw still places the total students in the District’s charter schools below the state average.
Let’s set the record straight about Imagine Schools. They are a $100 million dollar non-profit school management organization that assists parents to build and operate a public charter school. They currently help parents manage over 40 successful schools nationwide. Imagine Charter School at Firestone will be run by the parents. Those parents will elect the majority of the board and confirm the 2 appointments Imagine makes from parents or other community members, giving the parents complete control of the board and the ability to fire Imagine, Inc. at any time. Imagine provides something else as well. They will give a $7.5 million gift to the taxpayers by building a state-of-the-art public charter school. No more converting warehouses, no more worrying about the School Board kicking you out of a building, no more schools without playgrounds. $7.5 million in reduced future property taxes by all citizens of the District—rejecting this generous gift may be business as usual for the St. Vrain Valley School Board, but it defies logic to any thinking person.
How much has the School Board’s illegal and unreasonable demands and hostility toward this public charter school application cost the taxpayers of the district? Legal fees alone are now over $26,000. Add the school district’s accrued staff costs to date and future legal fees and staff costs as this goes to another appeal and we are most likely well over $50,000. $50,000 or more taken out of our children’s classrooms to further a misguided elitist agenda. How shameful.
The Daily Times-Call’s call to let this ridiculous decision be the “final word” flies in the face of America’s rich heritage of opposing tyrannical government. Imagine if the policy in the United States of America was to allow the lowest court or board to have the final say? Would we even have a FRL program? Imagine what our country would look like if there were no appeal available when, in 1951, the Topeka, Kansas School Board voted to keep their schools segregated. What chance would Martin Luther King’s call to “Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado!” have of happening if the United States Supreme Court didn’t overturn the school board’s decision in Brown vs. the Topeka Board of Education?
Michael P. Simone
Mayor
Town of Firestone
The next post are comments I made at a board meeting when a small group of people spoke from the "Help R Kids" yellow shirt group:
I want to thank everybody who spoke tonight. Any time you talk about children or education it seems to bring out the best and sometimes the worst in people—me included.
I can understand how emotional many of you are when it comes to issues that confront us concerning education today. I can also understand how many of you, who are completely satisfied with the education your children receive from our public schools, have trouble coming to grips with those parents whose children’s education is not being adequately addressed by the current public education status quo.
It's a difficult task for your leaders to make decisions when certain media outlets have a long-standing bias favoring this status quo. It's also very difficult for us when the well-financed and extremely vocal teacher's union does everything they can to fight change and the parents’ right to educate their children in the best way they see fit.
I'd like to give you a little background, one that I cannot get the
Let me give you a little history about the cash-in-lieu program. Up until about 10 years ago school districts required homeowners, through their builders, to pay impact fees to build new facilities. The developers said that this was illegal and took the case to the Colorado Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled that school districts could not require homeowners to pay an impact fee. So what the school districts did, to get around the law, was to develop a scheme to form agreements with the cities and towns that required them to pass an ordinance to collect "voluntary" impact
The underlying message to the homebuilders and homeowners was that if you don't voluntarily give this money to the school district, then your life will be made very difficult, and extremely costly, when you try to go through the Planning Commission and Town Board to get your development application approved. The school district was able to convince the municipalities to sign on to this unethical form of extortion. The school district couldn't ask the counties to do this since the state law already has a provision that allows the counties to collect voluntary impact fees and basically do what our former ordinance allowed us to do, that is, have some impact on what the school district was going to build within the neighborhoods. The school district has always, and still has the ability, to ask homebuilders to voluntarily donate funds to help with school construction.
I am sad to see this program eliminated in our town. I think we would all like to see new residents paying their own way when it comes to the impact they have on our public school system. The ethical and responsible thing to do would be to let the homebuilders and homeowners know that this program is truly voluntary and that participating or not will have absolutely no effect on their ability to get through our development process. The other ethical and responsible thing to do would be for the school district to allow the cities and towns to have the same rights as our neighbors in the unincorporated portions of the county have.
I know a lot of you here have your hearts in the right place when it comes to bringing the best education possible to our town. I sympathize with you though when you can't rely on the
It's our Town Board's duty to speak up when we believe any special district within our town is not treating our citizen’s fairly. We've had other issues with special districts but we've always been able to negotiate and compromise and come to an understanding that was agreeable to both sides. For 19 months we've tried to do the same with the school district but they will not give on even one point. Their position has been, from the beginning, that they will not negotiate, the town will extort "voluntary" fees from homeowners, and the town will give those fees to the school board to do with as they please. Their position has never been one of negotiation and/or compromise.
My advice for those of you who want to "Help R Kids" is to go speak with your school board. Here are some of the comments you might want to share with them and some questions you may want to ask:
Why won't you give Firestone the same rights that the counties have when it comes to money being voluntarily donated by homebuilders?
Why won't you negotiate and compromise with Firestone concerning this important issue?
Ask them to search for the best educational opportunities they can find for our children, some of which are right in their backyards.
Remind them that they should set the example for the children in the district and demand they be honest and ethical in their dealings. Continuously defying the State Board of Education only contributes to children's lack of respect for authority. Continuously lying to the public sets the worst example for our children. Tell them you will not tolerate their hypocrisy when it comes to the safety of our children concerning portable buildings and traffic issues.
Express to them your displeasure that they have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars, taken directly out of our children's classrooms, for legal fees and staff time to help ensure they are able to govern with an iron fist, quash any attempt at educational choice or fairness, and continue to extort money from newcomers into our area.
Let the school board, the teachers union, and the media know you're tired of the 30-year decline in our student’s achievement scores. Let them know if they don't look at new and innovative ways to educate our children they will continue to fall further behind and the future of our children, will indeed, be bleak.
So don't be fooled by the misinformation that's being spread by a few of the people in this room, school board members, and the
I think we can agree we are all concerned about the future of our children. Can we also agree we want a public school system so good you wouldn’t need to send your children anywhere else for a superior education? Can we all agree we don’t want the 30 -year slide in achievement scores for our children to continue? Can we all agree we don’t want school buildings and school property that is an eyesore and decreases our citizens’ property values?
I suggest joining forces with the Town of
We have been unsuccessful for the past 19 months dealing with the school district. We need your help. This issue is too important for any of us to ignore.
Thanks again for coming and thanks for sharing your comments with us.
Thank you for taking the time to read about this important issue. I have had a passion for education since I ran away from home to finish high school. All our children deserve the best education possible and it shouldn't matter where the good ideas come from--be it traditional, charter, private or parochial schools.
Charter School Myth vs. Fact
p>Myth: Charter schools charge tuition or special fees. Fact: Charter schools are free, public schools of choice. There is no tuition fee to attend. Charter schools are public schools open to all students. The primary enrollment limitation at most public charter schools is space availability or enrollment caps and restrictions placed by local school districts.
Myth: Charter schools take money away from public schools. Fact #1 : Charter schools are public schools. Per pupil funding goes to the school where the child is being educated.
Fact #2 : Public charter schools receive less total funding than non-charter public schools, resulting in more education per tax dollar. Public charter schools are funded using the same per pupil funding as non-charter public schools within the school district. Statewide, in 2001-2002 the average received by non-charter public schools was $9,127 per pupil. The average revenue received by public charter schools was less than $6,500 per pupil.
Also, public charter schools do not have the taxing authority for buildings and operations that public school districts have. As a result, charter schools usually do not have access to those substantial additional funds to use for facility and operational needs. For example, in some school districts that have issued voter-approved bonds or mill levy overrides, charter schools receive as much as $2,800 less revenue per pupil than other public schools in the same district.
Myth: Public charter schools only serve certain, mostly wealthy, students. Fact: Public charter schools offer a broad range of educational options, in a variety of geographical regions and serve a wide breadth of students. No two public charter schools are alike. Many public charter schools are created around a specific educational philosophy (e.g. Montessori, Core Knowledge or Expeditionary Learning), while others utilize traditional curriculum models. In addition, while some public charter schools serve the needs of a particular group of students (e.g. parenting teens), many public charter schools are developed to provide new educational options to students.
Myth: Public charter schools are not held to the same accountability standards as other non-charter public schools.
Fact: Public charter schools ARE held to the same state and federal accountability standards as all other non-charter public school, and are accountable to the school district that authorized the charter school. In fact, because public charter schools must meet all state and federal accountability standards AND they must meet special requirements of their contract with local school districts, public charter schools are often said to be more accountable than non-charter public schools. Public charter schools students must take the same CSAP tests as other non-charter public schools, they receive the same School Accountability Reports as other schools, and they must comply with the same provisions of Federal law, including the No Child Left Behind Act, special education requirements, anti-discrimination and other laws affecting public schools.
Myth: Charter schools are private, religious-based and/or selective.
Fact: Charter schools are free, public schools of choice and are open to all students. Public charter schools are non-sectarian, non-religious and are held to the same state and federal anti-discrimination provisions. As a public school of choice, charter schools have no admission requirements or fees.
Myth: Public charter schools employ under qualified teachers.
Fact: While almost every public charter school has waived state statutes mandating teacher licensure, most do hire licensed teachers. Waiving the statute provides flexibility to public charter schools to hire the teachers they feel best qualified for a particular position. Often, the best-qualified teacher is in fact licensed. In 2001- 2002, teachers in public charter schools had an average of more than 5 years of prior teaching experience. The federal “No Child Left Behind” Act requiring “highly qualified” teachers applies to public charter schools just as it does to all other non-charter public schools.
Myth: Public charter schools only exist in school districts that are failing to do their job.
Fact: Public charter schools are innovators in public education. Charter schools are not created as alternatives to non-charter public schools, but rather as a crucial part of offering choice in education to parents and students. Public charter schools enhance what districts are already offering.
Myth: Vouchers can be used at charter schools. Fact: Vouchers can only be used at private schools. Charter schools are free, public schools of choice and therefore are ineligible to receive vouchers. In fact, the voucher program will impact public charter schools the same way they will likely impact non-charter public schools. Students may decide not to attend a public charter school and instead attend a private school under the voucher program.
Charter School Funding Comments
These are comments that were published in response to an editorial in the Daily Times-Call.:
When will public charter school haters stop comparing apples to oranges? Public charter schools and traditional public schools receive roughly the same amount of money to run their schools--about $6500 per pupil. How much of the $6500 is used to pay for the traditional public school building? Not one penny. Taxpayers shell out over $2000 per pupil per year more to pay for the traditional public school building. Public charter schools rent, lease, or buy a building out of the paltry $6500 they receive. Too bad the St. Vrain Valley School Board doesn’t support educational choice and give the charter school another few dollars per pupil to buy a building the district could own if they want. When that happens we can compare apples to apples.
Longmont Daily Times-Call New Year's Resolutions
Before I was involved in politics I considered myself knowledgeable about current events. I read the paper and watched the news daily. I would also hear people complain about “media bias”. I, like many others I suspect, believed there was such a bias but not to the extent these people were complaining. Well, after almost 6 years as an elected official, I realize how wrong I was.
The Longmont Daily Times-Call pontificates on a regular basis to those of us who don’t subscribe to their views of the world and are quick to give us their advice. They are also quick to list resolutions for us “little people” to follow. Well, it’s time the Times-Call “self-reflects” and I’m here to help.
The following are my 2008 resolutions for the Daily Times-Call:
Don’t be afraid to encourage your reporters to admit they have a bias when they are gathering information for a story. To not do so only proves to reinforce the appearance of bias.
Stick to your policies. When you say election related editorials will not be printed after the Sunday before an election, do just that. Printing an editorial with false information about a candidate you don’t support on the day of an election confirms that your bias is not perceived but is, in fact, real.
Correct erroneous information and misquotes immediately and make sure the corrections are cleared by the involved parties before printing. Waiting one or two weeks to print corrections just doesn’t cut it. Give the corrections the same priority as the original story. A buried correction a few weeks after an erroneous front page headline story doesn’t cut it either.
Consider beginning a column allowing those who have been misquoted or taken out of context to submit “the rest of the story” so readers are exposed to both sides of an issue. You allow false information submitted by anonymous callers to be printed in the T-C line so allowing those you’ve “wronged” in your stories to have a forum to respond seems fair. This will do much to increase the credibility of the newspaper.
There are other media outlets in this area and on the internet. These outlets will print the editorials and calls to the TC line you refuse to print and the ones where you change or omit key points or comments. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been contacted over the past several years by people who submitted editorials or called the T-C line with issues contrary to your newspaper’s positions that went unpublished or significantly altered to lose or significantly change their effect. They thought as the mayor I had some influence in getting these published. Of course I don’t but I do refer those people to media outlets who aren’t afraid to print both sides of a story.
When 10 people come to one town board or city council meeting to oppose an issue your paper also opposes and then your editor prints there is “friction” between the elected officials and the citizens of the town, especially when there were 10 other people in room who spoke in favor of the elected official’s decision (who weren’t mentioned in your story), it just solidifies the readers’ perception of your intellectual dishonesty.
Be careful when your editors, because of their bias, print editorials that want to take away the rights the
When receiving an editorial criticizing an organization or person you support, don’t let that organization or person know about the editorial and allow them to respond on the same day you print the original editorial unless you are willing to do this for everybody. You can’t do much more to prove intellectual dishonesty than to continue your current policy.
Maybe these resolutions can help bring back the credibility I believe the Times-Call has lost with the public. Or they can “fess up” and admit they are a privately owned company with an agenda and bias and have no responsibility to be fair and balanced in their reporting or on their editorial page.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
