Do you know some place where we could put our return envelopes for supporters to mail back donations? 
Tell us where and we'll deliver them. 
Donations online are no longer being processed.

Home
UpOld Home Page2
Sleazy and ImmoralOld Home Page2

Who are the School Board's spies?

You've got to give credit where credit is due. The School Board has people spying on Let Duluth Vote. Its not enough that the School District is stingy with their own (the public's) information they want ours too. So badly do they want it that they have set spies on LDV. Harry Welty accused the Trib of sending over our ad copy to the District for them to preview and the publisher, Mr. McLister, vehemently denied it. He said he'd fire anyone who would do such a thing. He suggested someone in LDV might have done the dirty deed. He may be right. 

When the Reader Weekly asked Dr. Dixon for their March 27th, 2008 issue how the District got our ad copy in advance this is what he said:  "We received a heads up that LDV was crafting an ad and were able to get the initial copy. Part of our response was based on that copy. . ."

March 17, 2008

Steve McLister
Publisher
Duluth News Tribune

Mr. McLister,

I applaud the recent and tentative steps by the Duluth News Tribune to give the Red Plan serious scrutiny. The publication of Let Duluth Vote’s recent ad without censorship was heartening.

This compliment is tempered however. The two sides arguing over the Red Plan do not enjoy a level playing field with the News Tribune. That became clear in the recently published School District riposte to LDV’s ad. The School District ’s two-page ad misquoted LDV’s ad. These misquotes were actually accurate quotes from LDV’s earliest but discarded ad verbiage. Apparently our initial ad copy was given to the School District by someone at the Tribune prior to its publication. (See the evidence at the end of this message.) However, the School District did not notice LDV's changes before submitting its ad for publication so that it rebutted LDV's discarded and/or altered text rather than our actual ad.

I would recommend that instead of giving the School District a head’s up about potential problems the Tribune concentrate on getting the story of the Red Plan out to the public. . .

Evidence that the Duluth News Tribune shared Let Duluth Vote’s (LDV) ad copy with the Duluth School District prior to publication.

The following six indented paragraphs are taken from the School District’s two-page March 16^th ad rebutting LDV’s ad. They are all found together at the top of the middle column directly under the logo of the “ Long Range Facilities Plan.” The Purple text quoted by ISD 709 was NOT in the LDV ad published on March 12^th but was in the original ad submitted to the Tribune’s advertising dept. prior to publication. It seems that someone at the News Tribune shared LDV’s text with the School District prior to publication:

Ad Copy: Every Minnesota school district has the authority to levy up to $500,000 without holding elections . . .no one imagined that Duluth’s School Board could levy almost 600 times more than this without a referendum.

Response: Every school district in Minnesota has levy authority of up to $500,000 per project for Health & Safety projects per MN Statute 123B.57.  For Health & Safety projects that exceed $500,000, every school district has unlimited bonding and levy authority to pay for the improvements per MN Statute 123B.59 (except as regulated by MDI and Chapter 475 of MN Statutes)

Ad Copy: These laws set no spending ceiling for Duluth . Theoretically, our school board could spend more money than the federal government to build new schools.

Response: Minnesota school districts debt issuance is limited in two ways:  First, by Chapter 475 of the MN Statutes; specifically MN Statute 475.53, titled “Limit on Net Debt.”  Secondly, by the MN Department of Education through the Review & Comment process, this is required per MN Statute 123B.71.  When MDI reviewed Duluth ’s long-range facilities plan, they did examine its financial impact on the community.

Ad Copy: Only two Minnesota school districts have statutory authority to bond without elections but they are under strict limits. Minneapolis . . . is allowed to levy $15 million in a calendar year under Minnesota Statute 128.11, School District Bonds, subdivision 3.

Response: This statute does allow Minneapolis to spend up to $15M per year; however, it does NOT limit their spending to a total of $15M per year.  Like other Minnesota school districts, in addition to levy authority granted it under 128D.11, Minneapolis also has levy authority via MN Statutes 126C.40 (Lease Levy), 123B.57 (Health & Safety), 123B.59 (Alternative Facilities), and others.

Here’s what LDV’s original ad copy said: (Purple text was quoted by ISD 709 in its March 16^th rebuttal. The first two purple passages did not appear in LDV’s actual ad. The third purple passage was amended by LDV by adding the world “building” before the word “bonds” which renders the District’s response to the LDV passage inaccurate.)

The Minnesota statutes which permit the Red Plan are an accident.

Every Minnesota school district has the authority to levy up to $500,000 without holding elections when building bonds are for student safety. Until Johnson Controls Inc. saw how to reinterpret several statutes on school financing, no one imagined that Duluth’s School Board could levy almost 600 times more than this without a referendum.

These laws set no spending ceiling for Duluth . Theoretically, our school board could spend more money than the federal government. The legislature never intended to give any school board such ludicrous spending authority.

Only two Minnesota school districts have statutory authority to bond without elections but they have strict limits. Minneapolis is one. It is allowed to levy $15 million in a calendar year under Minnesota Statute 128.11, School District Bonds, subdivision 3. However, Minneapolis has 40,000 students, four times more than Duluth . If Duluth was held to the same per-student spending limit as Minneapolis , the Red Plan would be limited to $3.75 million a year or $75 million total. The Minnesota laws which permit our school board to spend $293 million without an election are an accident.

This is what the Let Duluth Vote ad printed by the Tribune did say: (Red text shows significant changes which the District’s reply does not take into account in its rebuttal. These changes render the District’s three responses irrelevant.)

The Red Plan ignores statutory intent and reasonable alternatives.

• Every Minnesota school district has the authority to levy up to $500,000 without holding elections for building projects which insure student safety. The Red Plan will levy $407 million (814 times more) without a referendum. See MN Statute 123B.59.
• Only two Minnesota school districts have the specific statutory authority to offer building bonds without holding elections but they are held to strict limits. Minneapolis is one. It is allowed to levy $15 million in a calendar year. See MN Statute 128.11. However, Minneapolis has 40,000 students, four times more than Duluth . If Duluth was held to the same per-student spending limit as Minneapolis , the Red Plan would be limited to $3.75 million a year or $75 million total. This is far less than the current projected cost of $407 million for Red Plan.

• There are several cost effective ways for the School District to eliminate its overcapacity and fix buildings. Instead, JCI and the School Board showed us three options that each cost over a quarter-billion dollars. Without a referendum we really have no choice.