I have decided to start this topic again in a separate posting because I feel it is of the utmost importance to those of us who have children in Pickerington schools. It is a decision that we might have to live with for the duration of the time our children are in school.
While I enjoy this vituperation of Uher as much as the next person, isn?’t anyone willing to address the serious matter brought up in the original posting? It seems to me from what I?’ve read and discussed with others that there is something afoot is the school boundary process. >From what I?’ve heard, a man from Glenshire and a close associate of his are steering this decision towards a previously agreed upon (with whom, we can only speculate) conclusion. If this man from Glenshire has indeed told his Civic Association that their children would attend the new school before even the third meeting, as I have read in here, this is a very serious matter. The perception of collusion is quite evident. Is the actual evidence in front of us and we are just not looking?
I?’ve also heard and read that since this man from Glenshire has been called out on his antics on the boundary committee, it appeared his manipulation campaign was losing momentum. He has resorted to bringing along his own confederates to support him. (sort of his own booster group) I understand that the meetings are open to all residents of the school district and all are encouraged to attend so he has the right.
At this point in time, I?’ll have to take the Yocum approach to this. You all have the right to get involved and make the right decision. If you choose not to, you take what you get and shut up. That is what he told us about those ridiculous school names. While I didn?’t agree with the names, he was right. Not enough people got involved in the decision process but plenty got involved in disputing them afterwards.
Perhaps what is needed here is for the boundary committee to publish an interim report. Show the residents what your best proposals are. Give three options to the residents and offer them 30 days to comment. Since it appears that the residents are bashful when it comes to making a decision, but fearless when it comes to attacking one, show them the work in progress and see if any more objective opinions and/or analyses will be initiated. By the way, for those who need clarification, by publishing it, I mean in a clear and readable format. If you don?’t mail it to every household in the school district as you should, at least do us the courtesy of putting it in the three weekly newspapers that have the largest circulation in the school district. Not the Eagle Gazette. I know that would be the letter of the law but not the intent.
Now let me make one more recommendation and I?’ll sit back and hope someone offers insight into this situation with the school boundary decision. At the bottom of the list of postings there is a link that says Next 20 Postings. In there you will find countless examples of the pre-resolution Uher. If you wish to continue this monk-ification of the political scientist and have to tolerate his kill them with kindness retorts, kindly click on one of those links and continue your work there. Don?’t worry, he?’ll find you. The issues before the readers of this forum and hopefully the whole website are exponentially more important than this insignificant little man.
By Maverick
While I enjoy this vituperation of Uher as much as the next person, isn?’t anyone willing to address the serious matter brought up in the original posting? It seems to me from what I?’ve read and discussed with others that there is something afoot is the school boundary process. >From what I?’ve heard, a man from Glenshire and a close associate of his are steering this decision towards a previously agreed upon (with whom, we can only speculate) conclusion. If this man from Glenshire has indeed told his Civic Association that their children would attend the new school before even the third meeting, as I have read in here, this is a very serious matter. The perception of collusion is quite evident. Is the actual evidence in front of us and we are just not looking?
I?’ve also heard and read that since this man from Glenshire has been called out on his antics on the boundary committee, it appeared his manipulation campaign was losing momentum. He has resorted to bringing along his own confederates to support him. (sort of his own booster group) I understand that the meetings are open to all residents of the school district and all are encouraged to attend so he has the right.
At this point in time, I?’ll have to take the Yocum approach to this. You all have the right to get involved and make the right decision. If you choose not to, you take what you get and shut up. That is what he told us about those ridiculous school names. While I didn?’t agree with the names, he was right. Not enough people got involved in the decision process but plenty got involved in disputing them afterwards.
Perhaps what is needed here is for the boundary committee to publish an interim report. Show the residents what your best proposals are. Give three options to the residents and offer them 30 days to comment. Since it appears that the residents are bashful when it comes to making a decision, but fearless when it comes to attacking one, show them the work in progress and see if any more objective opinions and/or analyses will be initiated. By the way, for those who need clarification, by publishing it, I mean in a clear and readable format. If you don?’t mail it to every household in the school district as you should, at least do us the courtesy of putting it in the three weekly newspapers that have the largest circulation in the school district. Not the Eagle Gazette. I know that would be the letter of the law but not the intent.
Now let me make one more recommendation and I?’ll sit back and hope someone offers insight into this situation with the school boundary decision. At the bottom of the list of postings there is a link that says Next 20 Postings. In there you will find countless examples of the pre-resolution Uher. If you wish to continue this monk-ification of the political scientist and have to tolerate his kill them with kindness retorts, kindly click on one of those links and continue your work there. Don?’t worry, he?’ll find you. The issues before the readers of this forum and hopefully the whole website are exponentially more important than this insignificant little man.
By Maverick
