[Masthead] Fog/Mist ~ 71°F  
High: 90°F ~ Low: 72°F
Wednesday, Aug. 27, 2014

Marshall school bond fails | Exceeds 50 percent approval threshold first time in 10 years

Tuesday, November 3, 2009

The Marshall school bond issue made its best showing yet, favored by a slim majority of district voters Tuesday, Nov. 3, but it failed to reach the 4/7 majority required to pass.

Slater's bond issue passed by a wide margin.

The unofficial election results in Marshall were 1,296 "yes" votes and 1,245 "no" votes.

The three recent bond issues -- in 2000, 2001 and 2003 -- failed to reach the 50 percent threshold. The result Tuesday also reverses a negative trend.

In 2000, the issue got 47.7 percent "yes" votes, in 2001 it got 46.6 percent and in 2003, it got 41.2 percent.

Another positive trend from the district's standpoint: The issue prevailed in three of Marshall's four wards. It was edged out by one vote among absentee voters, 47 to 48, but lost by large margins in Ward 4 and Blackwater.

The $20.3 million bond would have allowed the district to build a new school to house grades three through five, reduce or eliminate the use of temporarily trailer classrooms and retire one of the district's oldest school buildings.

Getting a simple majority was small comfort to the school board and bond campaign members who gathered to monitor poll results Tuesday night.

Marshall Superintendent Craig Noah, who wrote his dissertation on school bond issues, couldn't name a flaw in the campaign.

"They did everything right," he said. "It was a great campaign. The information was there." He said the situation reminded him of how things can go in sports, where great efforts don't always prevail.

Several bond campaign volunteers urged the school board to put the issue on the ballot in April 2010. Board members in the past have said they intend to keep asking voters to approve funding for new schools until they get the nod.

"We're not going to give up. We'll do it again," pledged school board President Larry Godsey. "The need hasn't gone away."

Wayne Crawford, co-chairman with John Angelhow of the bond campaign committee, said the process of educating the public should continue.

He declined to say whether he would continue leading the effort, saying that decision would be up to the school board. But he said he still believes in the cause.

"I really believe the community has faith in the current board and administration. And we know we have great faculty and staff," he said. "We have to convince the public that this is a serious, critical need."

Godsey said one aspect of the district's situation may not have been emphasized enough.

The money available for facility improvements has been low for several years, which means money for big-ticket items like repairing heating and air conditioning systems has to come out of the district's operating budget.

"That's money that should go for teacher salaries and books," he said.

Although the district has been trying for 10 years to get voter approval for new schools, officials had been hopeful the timing would prove beneficial this time because borrowing money has never been cheaper for school districts.

In addition to low interest rates, the federal government's stimulus program has made available money to dramatically reduce interest costs. Marshall officials had expected to get about $6 million in federal assistance.

The district will have one more crack at the federal interest aid. If the board places the issue on the ballot in April, and it passes, the district could still reap some benefit from the stimulus program.

The Slater bond issue was approved by a 167-56 margin, according to unofficial results.

Slater school district intends to build a new kindergarten/pre-kindergarten building, but will use revenue from its existing debt service levy to pay back the bonds.

Marshall does not have a debt service levy, so the issue would have established one, hiking property taxes by as much as 80 cents per $100 assessed valuation.

Contact Eric Crump at marshalleditor@socket.net

Related stories:
www.marshallnews.com/topic/mpsdbond09


Comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on marshallnews.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

Thanks

-- Posted by granny08 on Thu, Nov 12, 2009, at 6:50 PM

Thanks for the link and the info, Kathy.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Tue, Nov 10, 2009, at 3:17 PM

This guy, I obviously don't agree with all of your ideas and you don't agree with mine. I have, however, been in total agreement with some of your thoughts. I truly believe you care about our community's children as do I.

As for the sign, I know they ran out of them early. I called a friend on the committee and was told they only had money to print a small order the second time and they put them in high traffic areas.

Hopefully, the board will vote to put this thing back before voters. Those who have never voted for it, most likely will vote no again. Those, like you and me, who voted for it this time will hopefully be able to convince others that your children and the other kids in Marshall need this facility.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Tue, Nov 10, 2009, at 1:16 AM

oneofmany: The current school bond laws were established in 1963, according to this information from ballotpedia:

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Mi...

There isn't any information there about how they came up with 2/3 or 4/7, and I'm curious about that myself.

By the way, the debt ceiling level of not more than $6 per $100 of property value was established by Missouri voters in November 1950.

-- Posted by Kathy Fairchild on Mon, Nov 9, 2009, at 5:55 PM

oneofmany, i guess i got off track as well and no my mind wasn't made up...i voted yes on this, i want my kids to have this chance, i am merely speaking of the fact of what i have heard from talking to people, noone came to my door and when i called one of the committee members about getting a sign for my yard and the school admin office about getting a sign for my yard my call was never returned. and kathy, most of the organizations you mentioned have the same members and the same following, going to meet with them was time killed after the second meeting. Oneofmany, i do have some ideas, i dont have the ability to investigate them but i do have some ideas, you have found so many holes in the ones alrerady stated that i will keep the others to myself. it is strange though how people on here can find holes in everyones ideas but wont admit holes in their own.

-- Posted by thisguy on Mon, Nov 9, 2009, at 1:27 PM

I apologize for my response to the comment OMG made concerning my post about how majority should rule even in a presidential campaign. We both got off course. The topic here is the recent school campaign, and I think it should be a simple majority. I wonder what the original thinking was when laws were made determining the fraction needed to win an election such as this. Eric or Kathy, do you know?

-- Posted by oneofmany on Sun, Nov 8, 2009, at 10:10 PM

Here's an analogy about maintenance. I had to replace my 25+ year old furnace not long ago. I maintained it precisely according to the 25+ year old manual. I changed the filters. I even had the local dealer come out and check it annually to make sure it was safe and in good working order. Over the last two years, they had to come out four times in those two winters to replace parts. On the fourth time, I asked them to let me know if there were going to be rebates or low interest rates. Then, it was announced that a special tax incentive was available to replace old furnaces and AC units with more energy efficient ones. I did some research. Of course, I was shocked at the cost of replacement. I weighed the options and bit the bullet. Have I given up some things to pay for it? Yes. Would it have been cheaper to replace in five years? Should I have waited until it was no longer functioning at all? Could I have gotten another 25+ years out of it? I don't think so. Now, my heating bills are lower because it is more efficient. Regular maintenance does not change the fact that outdated buildings have outlived their usefulness. We must have a plan to replace them.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Sun, Nov 8, 2009, at 2:36 PM

I couldn't agree more. The fifth grade needs to be out of our middle school. The bond issue would have accomplished that goal.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Sun, Nov 8, 2009, at 2:12 PM

You're correct, in Bush's administration the women weren't wearing Burkas or being escorted by men. Instead, because Bush, Jr. went looking for the invisible weapons of mass destruction, our women are escorted by military personnel as they bury their children in flag-draped coffins.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Sun, Nov 8, 2009, at 2:11 PM

I was unaware of the specifics of the legislature's 4/7th requirement for this election. That is interesting.

Given how many other Missouri schools were able to get bonds passed this election, according to fvsol's post, it might well be a futile effort to try to get a change in the law, making a simple majority sufficient for passage of a local school bond measure.

I'm sure there will be much discussion in the months ahead as to why all those other Missouri communities were successful in getting there school bonds passed and why Marshall was not.

What factors made Marshall different from all those other communities?

-- Posted by Ray on Sat, Nov 7, 2009, at 10:38 PM

The insulation on modern electrical wiring is better (safer) than older electrical wiring. Ask any electrician, or insurance company which is safer/better. Still, there are very few schools that burn down due to wiring failures as I recall.

Many things have changed in construction and maintenance over the decades, such as use of thicker insulation, double and triple paned glass (quieter and more energy efficient), use of non lead-based paints, non asbestos insulation, non PCB transformers, etc., so newer schools are supposed to be safer than the ones older generations attended.

Old florescent ballasts contained PCB's, but Marshall schools may have changed them all out by now for the newer, energy efficient, electronic ballasts and compatible tubes. The new energy efficient lights amortize in about a year so if a school's maintenance manager buys them out of his operating budget, they're mostly paid for in the same fiscal year by lowered electrical bills, and in later years he reaps the benefit of the savings.

Modern HVAC equipment for schools is more energy efficient, but also very complex, some would say over-controlled, and the new equipment takes about 7 years to amortize. Any new school construction may have these new types of HVAC units specified, because of energy code requirements.

Anytime equipment has more parts and controls, there are more parts and controls that will breakdown. The new HVAC units may be saving energy, but they cost more to purchase and more to repair. They're not all that cost effective, compared to the older designs, in my opinion, but the new designs are all that's available. Consumers' energy savings appear to be largely offset by the increased cost of repairing these new, over-controlled, energy-efficient, HVAC machines, but HVAC manufacturers appear to be making money.

We live in an imperfect world. The old wears out and time reveals its flaws, its dangers and its shortcomings. The new and improved is allegedly better, but it too is sometimes less than ideal. And time may well reveal shortcomings in design and materials.

Future generations of Marshallites deserve a chance to learn from the mistakes of our past and an opportunity to do better. That's not easy given dwindling resources and other limitations that our over populated world must contend with. Future generations of Marshallites will need all the education they can get to survive in the brave new world of the 21st century, IMO.

-- Posted by Ray on Sat, Nov 7, 2009, at 10:22 PM

Ray: You may already know this, but on the off-chance you don't, the 2/3 requirement this time was a one-time change enacted earlier this year by the legislature. That, and the availability of cheaper bonds, was the impetus for this try at the bond approval.

-- Posted by Kathy Fairchild on Sat, Nov 7, 2009, at 9:52 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
Just to clarify, it was 4/7 majority requirement and that applies to all regular elections. The exception was made because Nov. 2009 was an "off year" and so the 2/3 majority would have been in effect if the legislature hadn't made the exception. According to Joe Aull, the April election will also have a 4/7 majority requirement for passage.

"Now I see we are at the point of the leaks and the poor old buildings are falling down. If this is true it is a failing of the administration for letting it happen. If the roof leaks now who failed to fix it two years ago before it became a problem? If the electrical is a safety factor, who let it get that way? Who has been in charge of maintenance all these years?"

---------------

In any question of the performance of school maintenance should come a questioning of the level of funding for maintenance. We see from this article that new construction bonds have not been funded. Has the maintenance of Marshall schools been adequately funded? At what level are the schools funded for "preventative maintenance," and "scheduled maintenance," or are the schools only funded for "breakdown maintenance?" Electrical insulation and current carrying conductors (electrical wiring) breakdown with usage. The life of most roofs is 20 - 30 years, depending on quality of material and weather conditions. If you put a new roof on a building and never allow a person to use the building, the roofs still going to be shot in a few decades. Roof patch can only go so far in repairing a brittle, old, leaking roof. That's certainly not a problem in regards to maintaining the roof, in my opinion, as much as it's a problem because of a lack of funding for "scheduled maintenance" to replace the roof when it's worn out.

If you turn on heating and A/C to heat, cool and ventilate school buildings everyday, that equipment will wear out just like a car that you drive frequently. Most states have education codes that require ventilation of classrooms with a certain percentage of outside air, and a minimum and maximum classroom temperature.

Some are making the argument here that if you build new schools, new business will come, but I will leave the defense of that claim to the people who made it. But I do forewarn you, if you build new buildings and use them, they will deteriorate, and the infrastructure will wear out. Even the best maintenance in the world will only put off the inevitable decline of infrastructure for so long.

As far as state of the art computerized classrooms, well - - - in my opinion, it appears computer hardware and software products are a bit of a racket and a bottomless money pit set up by computer hardware and software manufacturers. New hardware won't run old software, and new software won't run on old hardware. New computers are constantly be brought out as well as new software. In the realm of ever evolving, ever more poserful computers and their ever larger storage devices, are we really seeing a dynamic information revolution or are we just seeing a slick corporate marketing strategy, employing planned obsolescence of products to maximize profits? If you want to see something outdated way before it's time, buy a computer.

Still, Marshall's kids should not go out into the world computer illiterates so some level of computerization should be incorporated into any new building projects, IMO. And certainly Internet wiring needs to go into all new school buildings. Those not having access to the information revolution of the Internet are the information superhighway's version of roadkill, IMO. Educationally, when it comes to the Internet, get on, or get left behind (lying by the roadside).

-- Posted by Ray on Sat, Nov 7, 2009, at 9:12 PM

Does it take a 4/7th vote, or a 2/3rd vote or a simple majority vote of registered voters, to change the law that now requires a a 4/7th vote of registered voters to pass a school bond?

I live in a place where it used to take a 2/3rd vote to pass a school bond measure. Therefore, school bonds rarely passed. The law was changed a few years back, on a vote of the people, to say that a school bond measure will only require a simple majority to pass. Now, lots of bond measures pass (for better or worse), and lots of new school construction is going on. The new buildings are palatial, compared to the old.

Another way to get better voter approval of a school bond, in my opinion< is to involve the community in the educational, sports, music, art, and entertainment events of the educational facility - as much as possible. People feel they have a vested interest in education, and they feel they are more a part of the educational institution that way. I'm pretty sure Marshall schools make an effort to do this already.

Lastly, the low voting numbers may reflect varying degrees: of voter apathy, apathy about the educational system, and/or disinterest in an off cycle election (lack of major offices running in the election).

Lots of people have mixed feelings about money for education. People do care about schools, but unless they have kids in school, they have a hard time seeing a direct, personal benefit to school bonds - especially when times are hard. - In my opinion.

-- Posted by Ray on Sat, Nov 7, 2009, at 8:27 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
Ray,

I asked our representative, Joe Aull, about the 4/7 rule. He said it would require a constitutional amendment to change. Not impossible, but difficult.

Marshall may be unique in its 5-8 middle school arrangement, but there are plenty of schools about the size of Marshall who do not use neighborhood schools. For reference, use this site

http://dese.mo.gov/directory/

-- Posted by fvsol on Sat, Nov 7, 2009, at 6:58 PM

Socrates,

I agree with "Once you have pretty nice new schools in your neighborhood young families start moving in." I hear over and over that the community wants neighborhood schools. Maybe we should start there.

hootie and oneofmany,

Marshall is the only district in the state with this building configuration. Most districts have K-5 buildings. There is also a lot of research showing a resurgence of K-8 buildings. Maybe we need to research which school configuration is the best for student learning.

And yes, I would like to see new buildings.

-- Posted by peopleamazeme on Sat, Nov 7, 2009, at 4:51 PM

Oneofmany - "The majority of Americans voted for Gore, but because of the electoral college, Bush became our president. I wonder where we'd be now if the majority had ruled, as it should."

I would guess we would be paying $12 a gallon for gas, a CO2 tax for breathing and likely watching our women walk around in burkas (escorted by an adult male of their choosing of course).

-- Posted by OMG! on Sat, Nov 7, 2009, at 3:06 PM

taxpayer anyone can turn anything their way, It simply means I maintain my home so it does not leak and is safe for my family...

A school needing a new roof is not a sign of neglect in its self but it is if you let it go untill you have buckets sitting around for people to trip over while catching leaks.

We need new schools now, we needed them ten years ago, we just need a better way of paying for them instead of property taxes, and I KNOW ITS THE ONLY LEGAL WAY TO PAY FOR THEM AT THIS TIME.

Thats why we need someone to work on the rules and laws for us.

-- Posted by drop555 on Sat, Nov 7, 2009, at 11:09 AM

I suggest you go back and check the amount of maintenance that has been done by our district. Ask a maintenance person or school board member and they'll be glad to show you. I'm friends with a few of them. They've done a remarkable job. They're very skilled craftsmen who work hard and are proud of their work. Our buildings are safe, but expensive to repair and getting more so all the time. Again, I'm tired of my tax dollars going to patch them up. What is the magical number for how long these buildings need to last before we decide to replace them? One hundred years? One hundred twenty-five years? One hundred fifty years?

-- Posted by oneofmany on Sat, Nov 7, 2009, at 10:30 AM

Hey drop,

I'm not following your logic here. You say you put three roofs on your house, but if a school needs a new roof it's a sure sign of neglect by the administration? Are you saying you neglected your property three times?

Here's what it looks like to me: Things wear out. The culprit is wind & rain. Administrations come & go and some may do a good job and some may do a poor job of keeping things together, but all administrations have budgets that limit what they can do, however competent they might be about identifying problems.

-- Posted by taxedpayer on Sat, Nov 7, 2009, at 10:12 AM

Hey drop555 how about you run for the school board

let me know who you are and I will be glad to vote for you.

Sounds like you have all the answers.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 9:51 PM

Good vote red dog. who else matters, its just the way they try to sugar coat sorry wrong lemon coat the facts. If they cannot take care of what they have then they will not be able to take care of anything we give them..Not 18 sorry tired of the cr--! being fed to me. The Kids are first, but we cannot just give this much money to those who cannot handle what they have now.

-- Posted by drop555 on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 6:58 PM

I have decided some of the people who post here must be around age 18. They are so positive they have all the right answers. I was that way once. At age 18 I knew it all. Alas, as the years have passed, I have gotten progressivly dumber.

One thing hasn't changed. I always vote for the kids.

-- Posted by red dog on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 6:02 PM

oneofmany, this is first time I have every mention a name, I have read all the post. I have a home that I have put three roofs on, one by choice and two from hail and storm damage. Yes these buildings are old, but maintenance is a requirement. Let them get to a point of being unsafe for the childern in them and that is an administration failure any way you look at it. Neglect is a fault of someone. Do we need new schools yes. Do we need to let these fall down to prove a point no, another failure by someone if it happens. Sorry I do not care how old something is it can be maintained. We have a lot of houses in this town that proves that point over and over.

-- Posted by drop555 on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 5:24 PM

Again, I went back and read my posts. This guy, I'm confused about the term "blast." I didn't cuss as you did, I just disagreed and brought back some of the ideas that have already been addressed on this blog. I'm sorry if you were offended. I'm also sorry I missed visiting with you if you were on my route. If you have further questions, I'd call anyone on the committee or the school board. Hopefully, they'd be able to answer your concerns.

Also, I did some checking today. The spokesmen for the bond issue also spoke to church groups, Saline County Development Corporation, and others.

Good job, guys.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 3:06 PM

drop555, in the 1920's they put one electrical outlet in each classroom. Now some classrooms have more than 10 computers, a smartboard, printers,etc. They have modified the buildings as much as possible to be safe. They're just not practical. Again, Model T buildings, mini-van needs. I am not blasting your ideas, simply informing.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 2:50 PM

dropp555, read other posts. They have been repaired several times at great expense. I believe the current administration is in their second year and are doing a great job.

This guy, the KMMO spots were very well done. They ran repeatedly before November 3 and featured a variety of people who endorsed the bond issue. I don't listen to the local station all day, but I heard several of them.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 2:28 PM

Okay, this guy, I'm not blasting ideas, but simply showing that not every idea is feasible. By the way, it is my understanding that the district has continually maintained the roof. (See Model T analogy). Again, old buildings cost lots to maintain. I am confused about why you think I personally have something to gain. I don't work for the district. I am definitely not exempt from taxes. I'm just sick of seeing my good money go after bad by repairing hopelessly outdated buildings. Besides, staying in those buildings does not take care of the problem with overcrowding. By the way, is it possible that maybe you weren't home when someone came by??? Many people went door-to-door. I don't think it would have mattered. It appears your mind was made up a long time ago. Just out of curiosity, what would you have done differently? There were numerous open forums, public speakers who took the message to any group that would listen, radio, newspaper, the blog, door-to-door. I don't know what else could have been done to inform people.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 1:58 PM

thisguy: Organizations they spoke to included Lions, both Optimist Clubs, Rotary, and so forth. There are lots of them in town.

-- Posted by Kathy Fairchild on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 1:53 PM

oneofmany, no, I'm not a Carrollton resident. I attended their graduation this past spring and asked what the new building was. I realize that things are done on a smaller scale in their district, but my point was that they found a way to make do. Here we toss out vague plans for a $20 million+ thing to sit pretty much out of town and replace one, maybe two old buildings while raising our taxes a few hundred a year and can't believe people actually vote against it.

-- Posted by outsider on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 1:14 PM

Now I see we are at the point of the leaks and the poor old buildings are falling down. If this is true it is a failing of the administration for letting it happen. If the roof leaks now who failed to fix it two years ago before it became a problem? If the electrical is a safety factor, who let it get that way? Who has been in charge of maintenance all these years? Who has been overseeing this process to ensure our childern have safe surroundings to study in? If we give you a 20 million dollar school how long before you let your maintenance lag behind and it falls down? Won't take 90 years with the way things are built these days. If in fact these buildings are in as bad of shape as you want us to beleive I think we have bigger issues that need work before we build a new school and hand it over to you.

-- Posted by drop555 on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 12:37 PM

ok if buekers roof leaks that bad then christ all mighty....fix the damm thing, i voted yes because i want my children who are just starting the process to have the things i didnt, but my god, dont let the eventual and common wear and tear go on these schools to prove they need replaced, that is part of the reason that people have questioned the issue, if there is a problem with any of these schools that is imparative to be fixed it should already have been done.

oneofmany, you are an advocate the bond campaign should be glad they have, but noone ever came to my door, i attended two of the meetings and read every article in this paper, i would have went to more but i do have children and was unable to. and they talked to 30 different organizations? which ones? and a commercial on KMMO? cmon...how could anyone remember a commercial on KMMO, they play 63 one minute ads an hour. i dont know what the answer is and as i stated in my first post all i see you doing on here is blasting others cares and opinions...you keep fighting for this and you keep taking away from others and you slowly keep proving that your not fighting for our kids to win your fighting for yourself to win

-- Posted by thisguy on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 10:49 AM

Very good post Akura

-- Posted by Gal66 on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 10:44 AM

This is the modern era. What the school board and this paper needs to do is SHOW the community what the schools are like. Pictures, you-tube videos will tell the story far better than text, and "support the kids" banners. That way the people in this community that voted against the bond (and all the others) will be shown for what they are, just plain stingy and backward looking.

-- Posted by Akura on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 8:03 AM

Roof leaks can be fixed.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 5:40 AM

Actually, there were many public forums held when the school district BEGGED for input. Did you attend any of them? I did! Here are links to document those meetings.

http://www.marshallnews.com/story/158302...

http://www.marshallnews.com/story/157838...

http://www.marshallnews.com/story/157723...

http://www.marshallnews.com/story/156957...

http://www.marshallnews.com/story/156930...

http://www.marshallnews.com/story/156639...

Also, one of those articles stated that they spoke to over 30 groups explaining the particulars of the bond issue. As for Powerhouse, I believe Charles Stephenson actually did a commercial on KMMO endorsing the bond issue. Have you talked to the other groups you mentioned? If they have concerns, they should come forward and raise them.

I have voted yes every time it has come up for a vote. This time, I went door-to-door and spoke to anyone that would listen. Craig Noah tried to answer every question that was raised. He even offered to figure the amount of taxes any individual would owe. As for the football field, at Bueker, again they use it for PE. It doesn't do any good to recommend a smaller piece of land as 25 acres was required to build the size school we needed. That's not my figure but that of people who are trained and are much more knowledgeable about it than you or me. I agree bickering won't change it. Only voting will. I'm fighting for this until our kids win!

-- Posted by oneofmany on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 12:35 AM

xmarshallx, you're young. Again, you might save up. You're the one that's going to be paying for those schools when you're an adult. By the way, the parents that were there at parent teacher conferences a few weeks ago during a downpour would disagree with you. Try walking down the steps on the Effie street exit. Make sure you don't fall over the bucket in the corner.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Fri, Nov 6, 2009, at 12:03 AM

oneofmany,

Iv'e been to bueker on a rainy day, nothing happens. The schools are old, yes, but they are not in such bad condition that they are disrupting kids learning. The schools need to learn how to manage money and fix these so called problems.

-- Posted by xmarshallx on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 11:16 PM

Thanks to the contractor who made many wonderful comments about the impracticality of repairing buildings who are almost 90 years old. I compare it to Model T, the hot car of the 20's when our old buildings were built. Would you still be using your Model T today? It wouldn't be at all practical now. Finding parts and people to repair it would be impractical and expensive. Now try running thousands of children through that Model T over 8+ decades and see how it held up. Even if you kept it in good repair, it would still not be a practical car for today's needs. Our buildings are no longer practical to repair and have outlived their usefulness. We don't have enough space for all the kids that run through them. We need to replace them.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 9:52 PM

Outsider, you must be a Carrollton resident. I apologize, a friend of mine who lives in Carrollton had told me when it was being built that her children were going to have to walk to the high school for meals. Apparently that was not the case. However, I decided to do a little research. Yes, it is definitely a metal building with a little brick around the base. I would hope the building we hope to some day build would be pre-stressed concrete. I would think it would stand up better in tornadoes, etc. Also, there are three classrooms per grade level where we would need 8-9 per grade level. It is about one third the size school we would need. Carrollton, like many schools who are building new buildings, has no neighborhood schools. Do you know what they did with their older elementary? I believe it was called Root Elementary? It was built in the '20s as well.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 9:42 PM

Wow, am I glad my kids don't go to the Marshall Public Schools. The kids at MPS are missing out because people don't want to invest in their future, how sad. Keep it up and it will be like the Kansas City School District where they can't keep a Superintendent and are always involved in litigation over something. Be glad you have the leaders in the school you do now and move forward, for the sake of the children and the future of the community!!

-- Posted by interesting1 on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 9:41 PM

xmarshallx, you spent the last four years at the high school. Go to Bueker on a rainy day. Also, when you are 50, I'll probably be dead. You are going to have to pay MUCH more to replace those buildings then. They can't last forever.

Someone said, if those schools are so bad, why are they still being used? THEY ARE STILL BEING USED BECAUSE THE BOND ISSUES DIDN'T PASS! Again, if we had passed the bond issue in 2000, we would have built the two elementary buildings at once and be 6 years away from replacing Bueker. We have no choice but to use them unless we want to pitch a tent in the park to educate our kids!!!

-- Posted by oneofmany on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 8:40 PM

Auntmeme, why do you want neighborhood schools? I agree with hootie, I've found that the people who are in favor of it are generally not raising children now. I see no advantage to it educationally. Is it because parents don't want to be inconvenienced?? Oh, by the way, whoever it was that said "A few years ago, they did away with our neighborhood schools," needs to take a walk back in time. I believe it was around 1980....almost 30 years ago. I think consolidating our kids by grade level has been one of the best things we have done for our children in terms of educational benefits. Teachers can share materials, thus saving the school district money. They can discuss and share ideas. The students grow together as a class, meeting the kids their own age. Teachers can switch kids so they can concentrate on specific skills and projects. Most of all, there is equitable distribution of students from all over the community so one school doesn't have a larger concentration of kids who are from economically depressed areas. Likewise, all of the children of upper economic areas are not at one school. When we had neighborhood schools before, the children on the boundary lines were threatened with being moved to a new school as they changed the boundaries. Sometimes every year. Nope, I will argue against neighborhood schools and so will many others. Let the comments begin.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 8:34 PM

I think its funny,out of all the people I have talked to about this, the ones who would have children going to this school were all for it,the people who had no children or had children passed that age did not want it.

-- Posted by nancy007 on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 6:10 PM

Meme- with the way MAP testing and free lunch programs work neighborhood schools will not work anymore. Their day has come and gone. Do you really want 5th graders and 6th graders going to school with 1st and 2nd graders???? They don't even eat the same lunch portions.

-- Posted by hootie on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 6:10 PM

"I understand Carrollton's new elementary building is a Butler building without a gym or cafeteria."....wrote an earlier poster.

Wrong. It has a large gym and a very nice cafeteria. As for being a Butler building...it could be...is that a problem?

-- Posted by outsider on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 4:07 PM

THANK GOD! hOW MANY MORE TIMES DO THE CITIZENS NEED TO TELL YOU NO NO NO NO.. The ELECTED school board is and continues to not listen to the tax payers. Marshall is not Columbia, Kansas City . We want our neighborhood schools back that were taken away without our input. The economy is not where we feel that the chance of increasing our taxes. Listen to us we have told you the samething 4X's.

-- Posted by auntmeme3401 on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 3:50 PM

Gal66,

You don't KNOW if it will pass or not. It was very close this time. It could be people, like me, just need more answers. Especially with the economy being what it is these days.

-- Posted by Cardfan67 on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 12:00 PM

Cardfan67,

That is something you will not have to worry about as a bond issue will not pass in this school district anytime soon.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 11:01 AM

We've talked about how much this will cost per month/year. But how many years?? And if property is assessed again, I'm assuming this all could fluctuate or will it be set in stone at the amount when bond passes????

-- Posted by Cardfan67 on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 10:22 AM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
The bonds would have been for 20 years.

and would someone please....please shut that guy up!

-- Posted by thisguy on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 10:16 AM

jesus, onofmany, don't shame on the people of this town until you bring forth something useful as well...i mentioned buekers football field because it is in pathetic shape and they do nothing with it, there would be room for playgrounds to facilitate both if we didnt need to have one swing per student. all anybody on here is doing is bickering and that is the shameful part of it. yes our kids need a better environment to learn in, they need the facilities to do so, the teachers need the ability to teach without distraction and the main distraction now is us...everyone in this town, yes voters and no voters. did you as a presumed yes voter go out and talk to people and help this cause? we have so many outlets in this town for community developement, MSDC, Powerhouse, main street and i don't remmeber seeing any of those orginizations endorse this bond. i dont remember seeing any prominant figure in this town endorse this anywhere besides at the meetings and throwin a sign in the yard. our city officials stated, less than a week before we had to decide this that they would "look" into the traffic situation. well thanks for rushing right to that, i mean first we have to appoint some people to a tourist commission and then we have to cut a ribbon on a halfway house, but hey right after lunch we get on that. there should have been meetings and not just the school board type, i mean like town hall meetings, with everyone involved there, the architects, the mayor, the city council. maybe i missed it but did anyone in our city government ever endorse this? so shame on them maybe? shame on the "community developement orgs" for gathering the grant money and stimulous checks and then not doing a damm thing to better this community. the only real answers anyone recieved on this issue were from eric crump and kathy fairchild and they did an excellent job of trying to keep everything on the open air, but there are far more people and entities in this town to shame than the voters theirselves. who on earth are you to shame someones decision and opinion when it comes to deciding whats best for their family and children, you may not have the problem but there are families out there that want mothing morte but the best for their kids, so they work everyday top provide what they can and maybe that 100 dollars just wasn't there, i dont know, it's not my place to judge and it is noone elses. the school board should get right back on this horse...ride the damm thing til it is dead and put it right back on the ballot in april...start now with all the planning and questions and maybe get some help from our officials, our organizations, get some donations, get some alumni on this and get our kids the school they deserve, forget the need...get them what they deserve! this is our future and we are arguing over peoples shame...shame on us!

-- Posted by thisguy on Thu, Nov 5, 2009, at 10:16 AM

I graduated from Marshall High School last year and Iv'e lived here my whole life. NONE of the school buildings are in as bad of condition as they are making them out to be. And, if the school district would manage their money wisely, they could have had this "problem" already fixed. Why should people owe more taxes when they are already paying to much and nothing is getting accomplished? The people of Marshall are not at fault over this, are lousy school district is.

-- Posted by xmarshallx on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 10:44 PM

First thing first. As I pointed out earlier, the traffic issue was not addressed, and therefore the bond didn't pass.

Second, the price of concrete rises every 6 months. In 4 years, it may cost as much as 40 million to build.

Third, as someone who went to Marshall Schools, they were fine then, they are fine now.

Fourth, if they are that bad, they need condeemed.

And finally, how about remodel the old buildings for less money?

-- Posted by ieatsuperglue on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 10:16 PM

Cardfan76, please read my post. It explains that everyone pays for it, including renters.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 9:51 PM

I think every bit of the land used at the high school has been put to an appropriate use. As I've said before, we have no idea what changes are coming in education. In the 60's, career centers were unheard of. Yet they are a vital part of secondary education now. If you live in Sweet Springs, or Malta Bend, it is appropriate to build your schools all together because you do not have the student population we have.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 9:31 PM

kmt202, yes, the public has spoken and the majority voted FOR the bond issue. It's unfortunate that it had to be 57%. That part doesn't seem fair to me. It's sort of like the 2000 presidential election. The majority of Americans voted for Gore, but because of the electoral college, Bush became our president. I wonder where we'd be now if the majority had ruled, as it should.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 9:27 PM

Below is a preview of your comment. If you are satisfied, press the Save button at the bottom to finish posting your comment. If you wish to correct something, use your browser's Back button to return to the previous page.

Below is a preview of your comment. If you are satisfied, press the Save button at the bottom to finish posting your comment. If you wish to correct something, use your browser's Back button to return to the previous page.

Below is a preview of your comment. If you are satisfied, press the Save button at the bottom to finish posting your comment. If you wish to correct something, use your browser's Back button to return to the previous page.

Folks why is it that Marshall is the only town in this area that is denying funding for new public schools? How many times is this now? You can't tell me it is because "people didn't like the plan". Marshall is driving distance from Columbia. It is also fairly close to Kansas City, which has problems in the past, but has started to really take off as of late. Marshall has the potential to grow and take advantage of this. Marshall also has other bigger problem. We have a huge senior citizen population and once those people die there is going to be a glut of housing up for sale. If Marshall is unable to market itself as a place people would want to raise their kids, all that housing is going to be seriously devalued. Yes, you save yourself a few dollars per month on property taxes. But, to what end? Marshall is run down. The court house looks like crap, its full of dilapidated commercial buildings, and compared to towns like Carrollton our neighborhoods look pathetic. This school project should have been the start of a hopeful future for our town.

School buildings are not just about the kids going to the schools. They add property value to every house within driving distance. The area around the school site would have experienced a huge rise in property value. People like living near their kids schools. It would have revitalized the whole neighborhood. Then there is the infrastructure benefits that we are now going to miss. That school could have provide a place for summer day camps, daycare, after school programs, community group meetings, local kids sports etc etc. We also gave up all of the jobs that would have been created for our community. Rarely do your taxes get spent on anything that actually would directly impact your community. Here you get to use tax dollars to directly create jobs for your community and business for all of the supporting businesses. Materials need to be supplied, workers fed, truck drivers to deliver all of the supplies etc etc. Often big projects like this springboard small business in the community. Once you have pretty nice new schools in your neighborhood young families start moving in. They start fixing up their houses and yards and next thing you know YOUR property value goes up. The money you thought you spent goes right back into your pocket and you feel good that your town is on the up and up.

Not to mention the vote no came at a time of unprecedented government spending (that will now just go to other communities) and at record low interest rates. This whole situation makes no sense. There is never going to be a perfect location or plan to get behind. You elected the officials that run this town. Let them do their jobs and support projects like this that can only be a win win for our town.

-- Posted by Socrates on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 8:40 PM

kmt 202, I'm already in Slater with your tax money(if you pay any}, your jobs, and a new school.Thanks

-- Posted by hootie on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 7:42 PM

WOW, look at all the cry babies! The public has spoken. If you don't like it, move to Slater.

-- Posted by kmt202 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 7:19 PM

I am reminded of the old proverb, "It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in an argument."

So I'll stop argueing with many of you. Cheers

-- Posted by Greg House on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 6:50 PM

I am saddened to see Marshall turn into the backwards thinking, self centered community that showed itself yeaterday. Many people have questioned why marshall is the way it is. Simply put, you reap what you sow.

You say that it's teachers that teach our kids, not walls and buildings. Unfortunately, if the walls are coming down around you and roofs are leaking and the electrical needs do not allow for more teachnology, then it is the students who do the suffering.

You ask why aren't more businesses locating here and why are so many current businesses leaving? Well, if big business is going to locate here, they are going to investigate in how we invest in our schools. Who wants to put their kids in schools whose most recent improvements took place in the 1970's? Do any of you still wear your wardrobe from the 70's? Eh?

If the students who are in the schools now, see that we do not want to invest in their future, they are not going to be willing to stay and raise their own families here. They, like big business will locate in nearby communities that invest in their schools and give a tinkers darn about the kids in those schools.

When those things happen, and your community stops shopping in your stores and shops, the retail end can not pay its rent and then those businesses close. That's why you see so many empty buildings.

It is sad to see this community bicker about what the best step should be in improving the situation. the unfortunate fact is, the more we gripe and shoot down ideas, the longer it will take to make the progress that we so desperately need. The longer it takes us to make up our mind, the more expensive it's going to be down the road. Ten years ago, the same amount of money that is being asked for now, could have built 2 buildings. If we wait anoter ten years, that 20 million is going to only provide us with one half of a building.

Grandfather used to say, do your business or get off the pot. Unfortunately, our pot is crumbling.

Now what are we willing to do about it?

-- Posted by Greg House on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 6:31 PM

More results from around the state. How's the poker reference go--if you can't spot the sucker at the table, it's probably you?

Sturgeon-- PASS 86%

Harrisburg-- PASS 81%

North Callaway-- PASS 73%

Russellville-- PASS 77%

St James-- PASS 74%

Springfield-- PASS 65%

KC-Center-- PASS 77%

North Platte-- PASS 57%

Mexico-- PASS 74%

Brunswick-- PASS 90%

Versailles-- FAIL 26% (wanted to build an $8Million Fine Arts building)

Windsor-- PASS 83%

Republic-- PASS 74%

Sparta-- PASS 68%

DeSoto-- PASS 72%

Winfield-- PASS 83%

Hillsboro-- PASS 58%

Riverview Gardens-- PASS 59%

Carl Junction-- PASS 70%

Webb City-- PASS 76%

Pierce City-- FAIL 51%

Independence-- PASS 69%

Rock Port-- PASS 57%

Maysville-- PASS 84%

Stewartsville-- PASS 80%

Trenton-- PASS 74%

St Joseph-- .63 cent levy-- PASS

....all of this is in addition to the double-digit amount of school districts which passed bond issues in the spring of 2009.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Mi...

-- Posted by fvsol on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 6:23 PM

I saw one post that told the number of voters in Saline county verus the number of voters to turn out, that is the sad part. I am a no vote but that is a shame..If this is as hot as we make it then the vote should have been 5000 t0 4899.

I also saw remarks about the 911, eastwood bridge, and the airport. Guess what not property taxes, sales taxes in most cases.. I saw one post about it being illegal to use sales tax, you are right but laws are changed each day and its time this one is changed. We have a repesentive in Jeff City that was involved in some of the defeated bond issues before, maybe its his time to work on the law for us.

-- Posted by drop555 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 5:53 PM

The people that have kids in the school system should pay % tax per kid = 1)I don't have to pay for their kids, that I did not choose to have, get educated. 2)Maybe they won't have so many kids and we won't have to bump them out into trailers because of sheer numbers...........

-- Posted by awake on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 5:43 PM

Thank you Eric.

M

-- Posted by missy08 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 5:31 PM

raniswonger: The tax is calculated on the *assessed* value of your property (not the market value), at the rate of 80 cents per hundred dollars of valuation, so if the assessed value of your property is 100,000, the tax would be $80 annually for you (100 times 80 cents).

-- Posted by Kathy Fairchild on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 5:15 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
Ah yes. And you get the assessed value by taking 19 percent of the market value. So $100,000 market value = $19,000 assessed value. The tax is per $100 so you divide by 100 and get 190, and 190 time 80 cents = $152 per year for a $100,000 house.

Farmland, btw, is assessed at 12 percent of market value.

oneofmany...my point was that, with proper planning there WOULD HAVE BEEN room on the high school grounds for more buildings. Earlier planners (or boards) seemed to have a severe case of cranial rectitis and took a shotgun approach to building facilities. Obviously it's too late to correct that situation, so the best we can do it see to it that similar mistakes aren't repeated.

-- Posted by outsider on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 4:58 PM

Wal-Mart certainly didn't help the grocery stores, but that's hardly the end of the empty space. Lets also not forget the new dollar store that went in next to Wal-Mart, we need ANOTHER dollar store?

Anyone know what the next step will be? Are we going to wait another 6 years and have another bond issue? Eventually, not having proper schools is going to make me want to leave this community.

-- Posted by Akura on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 4:55 PM

What would be the calculated tax if the proposed

$0.80/$100.00 for a $100,000 evaluated property were passed? I'm not understanding all these numbers being tossed around in this blog.

-- Posted by raniswonger on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 4:53 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
A house with a market value of $100,000 would incur a tax of $12.67 per month or $152 per year if the the 80-cent levy had been put in effect.

"I find it unbelievable a community like this has actual blighted retail space."

uh...can you say Wal Mart? The Waltons and the Chinese are laughing at us at this very moment.

-- Posted by outsider on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 4:48 PM

I'm really stunned by this defeat. Schools are only part of the problem with Marshall. I find it unbelievable a community like this has actual blighted retail space. The old IGA building, the building, the panda buffet, the grocery store building next to Orscheln, the old pizza hut (I could go on).

Could a new school be built on one of these vacant properties? Or could one of the buildings be taken over and converted to classroom space?

If we want to know what stops business from investing in Marshall, its these vacant properties that show nothing but business failure. Convert one into classroom space and you've killed two birds with one stone.

Now that the perfectly good bond proposal has been defeated, I don't know what other possibilities there are.

-- Posted by Akura on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 4:36 PM

I am a no vote, I have stated my concerns all along the way.. I saw one person state the facts about the turnout..Even as a no I would have been much more happy if 8000 votes were cast instead of 2500, that is sad. That is a worse evil than all else, everyone has to vote this is important anyway it goes. I saw people say things about the 911, the eastwood bridge, the airport, you are right money maybe not so well spent, but guess what its not property taxes. Its sales taxes and that is what the school system needs...

-- Posted by drop555 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 4:29 PM

Wow! I want to give a shout out to Slater! What Forward thing people you are. You figured it out! You assesed a proplem, decided what you needed, and solved it in a short period of time. What a great opprotunity for the unemployed, the children, and the community. Marshall your tax dollars, jobs , and pride just left town. Amazing that the only district in the state that had a bond issue and didn't pass it was Marshall because you couldn't stop arguing over location or traffic.

-- Posted by hootie on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 4:28 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
It should be noted that Slater's bond issue did not include a tax increase. That's because Slater already has a debt service levy it was able to use to make payments on the new debt. Marshall has no debt service levy.

If the students of Marshall are unable to learn and thrive in 20th century facilities I'm afraid we are going to have more of them who believe "Larry GIT-R-DONE the Cable Guy" is a great man.

That my friends is the mentality we are dealing with.

-- Posted by Seagarr on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 4:06 PM

Why do people keep asking the same questions over and over even though they've been answered dozens of times? Why do people keep coming up with the same "great alternative ideas" even though it's been explained many times why they won't work? This new school was not only for the children but also for the community. When a community does not advance and grow with the times the younger generations move away and don't come back. Why? Because they want better for their children. This leaves only closed minded people with short term memory loss (that keep repeating the same questions over and over) to set around and stare at their empty crumbling buildings, talking about the good old days, and asking each other why things aren't like they use to be. What a pretty picture. Spend your $100 wisely.

-- Posted by JustFYI on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 3:56 PM

There are many people in this community that have children in our public schools but do not own property. How are they going to be taxed?

-- Posted by Cardfan67 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 3:37 PM

As a strong supporter of the children in our community, I want to point out that many wonderful thoughts have been raised in response to this article. Greg House summed up a lot of my feelings.

On the other hand, some other people have made responses so bazaar you have to think they're mimicking the writers for the Colbert Report. For those who don't watch that show, Stephen Colbert makes comments that are so off-the-wall they can't be taken seriously. Please tell me that's the case!Building the school at Bueker's football field? Where would Bueker have their PE classes? There is not enough room for expansion, parking, playgrounds, etc. I guess we could just storm the business adjacent to them on Odell with pitchforks and run them out of town so we could take their land. Tearing down the MHS football stadium and most of the buildings on the high school campus? A K-8 building? We can't get them to pass a $20 million bond issue. A K-8 building would house over 1500 students, cost $60 million, and would require much more land. (Also, again, our bonding capacity would not allow it! Can you imagine the tax increase for that????) Changing architects now after they've spent almost ten years with our district developing plans? The blueprints are set up for expansion in the future. This has not been a rush job. If we abandoned the architects now, that would make for a rush job! Oh, by the way, it is my understanding that these architects specialize in designing schools. They've built hundreds of schools in our state and region. I think they've done a wonderful job!

We can only point to ourselves. Shame on this community!!!!

-- Posted by oneofmany on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 3:14 PM

Didn't Larry the Cable Guy say GIT-R-Done? Even he would find it hysterical that he was considered by anyone to be a "great" man! Maybe we should ask him to donate the $20,000,000 our children need.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 2:38 PM

The only way this poor excuse for a community gets a new school is if some very rich person gives the district the money no strings attached!

Come on Bill Gates...............

But then again the great people in this town would complain about the looks, location or some other crap and turn it down!!!!!!!

And don't say it would not happen just look at what has been said about the Sports Complex!!!!

-- Posted by Gal66 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 2:22 PM

Happy EMT have you not seen that all our school district could borrow was the 20m by law?

We could not borrow enough to build a bigger school period!

-- Posted by Gal66 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 2:15 PM

Ignorance and stupidity rears its head once again.

No wonder people are leaving this town.

Another big day for the flat world society.

Maybe if we're lucky we can go back to the days of children gong to school in their barefeet with a strap to hold their books together slung over their shoulder.

-- Posted by Hombre on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 2:04 PM

Mofireman, I'm pretty sure I didn't see the airport improvement, courthouse renovation or any of those others you listed on a ballot come election time were the public could vote yes or no!!!! Cause I'm pretty sure most people would have shot down the airport and the beazley place.

And when it comes to the school bond issue I believe our kids need new schools but every person I have talked to that voted NO has given me the same excuse, 20m for only 3 grades is crazy... and I agree, forget that I dont agree with the location per say or that it will increase my taxes because i would gladly pay more, but not for 3 grades. I truely believe if the school board would have proposed a tax levy that supported K-5 it would have pasted even if they asked for more than 20m.

-- Posted by Happy EMT on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 1:57 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
Voters approved a 1/4-percent sales tax to pay back bonds for the courthouse renovation:

www.marshallnews.com/story/1324206.html

The Martin Community Center/Nicholas Beasley Aviation Museum was a private nonprofit capital campaign.

The school board could not ask for more than $20.3 million. That's the legal bonding capacity the district currently has.

I understand Carrollton's new elementary building is a Butler building without a gym or cafeteria. Again, Carrollton is much smaller community and their school population is much smaller. We don't have the space at our high school to build the building we need!!!! Even if we could build a building on the high school grounds, we could not share gym and cafeteria facilities with them Our elementary kids would have to eat lunch at 9:00 to get everyone in. Not practical.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 1:39 PM

The kids do need a new school but I cann't afford another tax. I know $240 a year tax increase isn't much for a new school, but when you add that to what is already paid and the lost of my work hours it all adds up. Instead of asking for a new tax why not ask for donations, instead of selling candy bars for trips sell them for a new school. We just have to look what Mr Ron Ott has done with the hospital's cancer center it was built with partial donations. As a community we can do great things and not have to wait for the government's help, school leaders think outside the box don't wait for help, as a great man once said GIT-R-DONE.

-- Posted by JohnnyD on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 1:37 PM

Once again, a sales tax is not a legal way to provide buildings for school districts. Even though this has been explained numerous times, the only fair (and legal) way to supply funds for public school buildings is through property taxes. Again, everyone who lives in Marshall pays property taxes. Renters pay it through their rent. The owner of the property includes the insurance, taxes, and mortgage amount in with the payment. It is the only fair way to finance our buildings. Let's switch it around. What if Sedalia had financed their new high school with a sales tax (which of course they didn't because it would be against Missouri statute)? Heaven forbid, if you decided to shop at Sedalia's Penneys or Big Lots and you were charged sales tax you would actually be supplying money to pay for their school. Not something I want to do. Likewise, people from Slater who shop at Marshall's Wal-Mart should not have to pay sales tax to support Marshall Schools!

P.S. Slater PASSED their bond issue, so they get to make the improvements needed for their children.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 1:33 PM

Nobody seems to have focused on the cost of borrowing now, compared to in the future. Right now, this type of bond is underwritten with a very LOW rate of interest from a historical standpoint. NOW is. . . er,was. . . the time to be borrowing for capital improvements. Perhaps this time of low rates will still be with us when a bond issue is improved, but I doubt it.

The moving hand writes, and having writ, moves on. . . as that Arab dude once wrote.

Nonny

-- Posted by Nonnymus on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 1:10 PM

Gal 66, I think the answer is that some people in Marshall who voted against this ARE the dumbest. Why would you not vote YES for this schoolproposal?! **** "No such thing as free money" Well, you're right, but it's as close as it's going to get, and since we didn't step up for it, some one else gets it.

"Just spend the money to fix existing schools" How long is that going to be an option? You can bail all the water that you want, but sooner or later you're just going to need a new boat.

-- Posted by thebirdman on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 9:44 AM Birdman....My sentiments exactly!!!!! I sooo feel sorry for the children in the Marshall School District. Come on, even Slaters passed. This just sucks, it really saddens me. What happened to people opening their eyes and hoping for CHANGE! Bummer.

-- Posted by karma is real on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 12:54 PM

Hey ups44... Thanks for the info. A friend of mine had said her taxes would increase by about $280. I know some people just don't have an extra $20 at the end of the month.... No, it won't get any less expensive. I don't know the answer.

-- Posted by missy08 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 12:51 PM

WOW! Those of you who helped vote the bond down, you did it. You really showed those money hungry zealots and you certainly stuck it to the MAN! Wait... the MAN is approximately 9-12 years old and less than 5 feet tall. Nice.

-- Posted by too amazed on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 12:47 PM

I have been reading the posted comments and would like to respond concerning the issue of remodeling the existing buildings. Having been in building construction for 35 years I know from experience that there comes a time when it is more feasible to build new structures than spend countless dollars trying to create something new out of something that is past its prime. Like the old saying is, you can't make a silk purse out of a pigs ear. If a complete remodel was done on the existing buildings and everything was done to meet the stringent building codes the cost would be unjustafiable. I for one agree that a new building needs to be built and even though I don't have kids I voted for this. Based on my current assesment my taxes would have increased $240.00 a year. That is only $5.00 a week. Heck a pack of smokes cost close to that. The bottom line is the longer that this is put off the higher the construction costs will be. This time it was 6 million $$$$ higher than just a few short years ago.

-- Posted by ups44ml2 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 12:38 PM

People in this town should be ashamed of themselves, We spend money for airport improvements, the beazley center, park, courthouse, a dead dog uptown, 911, saline county sherriff dept, ambulance district, and so on wow.....but when it comes to giving the kids a building they need, NOT WANT, the voters turn it down, SHAME ON YOU ALL!

-- Posted by mofireman on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 12:34 PM

Eric or Kathy, or whoever might know --

As stated in this article, "Marshall does not have a debt service levy, so the issue would have established one, hiking property taxes by as much as 80 cents per $100 assessed valuation."

So, if somebody owns an $80,000 home in Marshall, and this had passed, what would have been the cost to them annually? Just curious.

Thanks.

-- Posted by missy08 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 12:29 PM
Response by Eric Crump/Editor:
I'm guessing for an $80,000 home the annual tax would be in the vicinity of $100.

Information from the district: "In order to calculate the impact of $0.80, simply follow this formula: Assessed value of the property times $0.80, divided by 100, divided by 12."

and

Residential Property

Market Value / Monthly Increase of $0.80

$40,000 / $5.07

$50,000 / $6.33

$60,000 / $7.60

$75,000 / $9.50

$100,000 / $12.67

Well Kathy that is very sad that over 75% of the people that could vote just did not care enough to get off their lazy behinds!!!!!!!!!

One thing we all may want to think about is that the board sets the school tax levy and I don't see anyway to do the work that needs to be done in this district without it going up, I bet we have one of the highest tax levys in the area in the next year or so, and there is nothing you all can do about it in the next 6 years or s because that is how long it would take to vote a complete new board in.

And that's just to take care of the old building and trailers.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 11:58 AM

I'm originally from Marshall but haven't lived there since I moved away for college years ago. My Mother has worked for the district for many years and will be retiring in the near future. All I can say to the Marshall citizens and school children.........I'm SO SORRY!!! It's such a shame this didn't pass. I know people had their own reasons for voting "NO" but it makes me sick when "not having enough money" is thrown out there and used because that's just a pathetic excuse. There will "never" be a good time for money but you just find ways to make it work. I'm just really glad that my child won't have go through the Marshall school district (and so is my Mother)! Which is pretty sad.

-- Posted by luv4animals on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 11:47 AM

It is futile to argue with JOby. He is toying with you and probably laughing at you on Facebook.

-- Posted by born-n-raised on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 11:44 AM

Gal66: There are 10,733 voters eligible to vote on Marshall School District issues, according to the county clerk. Yesterday's turnout represented less than 25 percent of that total.

-- Posted by Kathy Fairchild on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 11:40 AM

Gal66,

It's a stupid law. Maybe it should be changed.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 11:23 AM

It is hard to believe the patrons of the Marshall School District don't want to get the ball rolling on a long range plan to have decent facilities for the children.

It looks like complete remodeling will have to be done on the old buildings. The same patrons that voted no on the bond issue are really going to be upset when they see the money involved in making the old appear new again. The plumbing and electricity alone are going to be very expensive. The asbestos will be required to be removed when rehab is done. This will be very, very expensive. When it is done, the building being worked on, and we have four of them, will have to be shut down. You also have to think about Bueker. How much more has to be done to Bueker to make it like new.

When any rehabilitation job is done, there are always unexpected obstacles found. This is going to get very, very expensive.

Where is the money coming from for all this? The District has only so many dollars coming in. It won't be possible for all the work to be done very rapidly because of a money shortage. What the District has coming in now is spent to maintain what we have, not rehabilitate.

Look out folks, we are going to have to pass some kind of bond issue to buy trailers to hold classes in. Can we park them on the fifty yard line? That is a facetious question, but the real problems are now starting. Maybe some of the Churches will step in and offer the use of their facilities while remodeling is done.

The patrons want the District to make do with what they have. I pity the children. They can't go looking for another school to learn in. The teachers can look for employment elsewhere. The teachers have an option, the kids don't.

So sad.

-- Posted by red dog on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 11:00 AM

We have a bridge to nowhere being built with wasted tax dollars. (city board) We have large amounts of tax payer dollars going to repair a courthouse that was neglected by our elected officials for so many years that it needed a major renovation. (county board) We had an over $2 million dollar expansion of an airport to nowhere done with wasted mo-dot tax payer dollars.(City board) We have millions being wasted on a grand palace of a 911 center that is wasting so much money it isn't funny.(county wide board) Now you want us to trust another board and authorize $20 million in more tax payer dollars because nothing was planned out over the last 20 years. Maybe the people are just taxed out and their trust in tax wasting boards are null?? I've yet to see where any of these projects has attributed to bringing any new jobs, or new revenue into our community?????

-- Posted by Gumby on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 10:51 AM

are you people NUTS? Why would we want to tear down one of the most beautiful football stadiums in the state of Missouri. People get real, look at the money we are saving having our own field and athletic facilities. Yes I agree it would be more practical to buy the Marshall Plaza but do you want to donate $5 million dollars to the school to do this, these people want way to much for that eye sore and it is a slap to the citizens of Marshall to have people see this when they drive thru or come in to our town. The school board has done the best job they can in finding places, but it is obvious you don't want a new school, rather you want to pour money in referbishing the old dilapitated schools. Ok people time for you to get involved in solving this problem, go to the board meetings, talk to your board members, lets find a solution so we can put this to rest GET INVOLVED. Again lets stop this nonsense about destroying a stadium that is looked at by everyone in Missouri as the best complex in the state. Maybe it is time the city officials get involved and help to find a suitable place for our kids, I don't see them coming to the board meetings or giving assistance in this. Again Marshall lets pull together and stop fighting and find a solution acceptable to everyone.

-- Posted by froom on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 10:49 AM

thats too funny, personal bias....contrived...put the thesaurus down. we all have personal bias...our opinion is ours and our opinion should be the only one that matters to us, if our opinion is not the only one that counts it is in fact not our opinion at all. and honestly i didnt care if there was any harm done, i was simply staing that for some reason your intellect bothers me. i have found that people that use "big" words that much usually are trying to compensate for lack of any knowledge or sense to begin with...but hey no harm meant by that either

-- Posted by thisguy on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 10:12 AM

There comes a time that you longer keep sinking money into a old car because its no longer makes since. The same is true with our old schools. So the arguement that the old building are good enough isn,t even a valid point.

You know if Marshall would have passed this thing the first time, it would have been paid for be now.

So don't go and buy a new car because there to expensive.(like there going to get cheaper by waiting) And keep cooking on your wood stove because it's good enough.

Well Marshall enjoy your model-t!

-- Posted by spencer on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 9:50 AM

I agree that it wasn't the best solution, but we've got to stop kidding our selves. If you're concerned about it being too expensive, I wouldn't plan on buildings (of any size or # of grade levels) getting any cheaper. Unless, of course, inflation ceases to exist or some such nonsense.

"No such thing as free money" Well, you're right, but it's as close as it's going to get, and since we didn't step up for it, some one else gets it.

"Just spend the money to fix existing schools" How long is that going to be an option? You can bail all the water that you want, but sooner or later you're just going to need a new boat.

-- Posted by thebirdman on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 9:44 AM

My job this year: my company asked us to cut our hours back in April, we got a horrible new insurance plan over the summer, we lost company contributions to our 401k a couple months ago and now, we just learned no one would receive a raise this year. I think I would rather take what little money I do have and provide a good life for my children rather than dumping money into a school complex. Maybe it's easy for some people who have money, but when it's not in my pocket to give...

What about our business owners? Wouldn't they have been slapped doubly? Not only their homes, but their business would have been hit as well, correct?

-- Posted by Green Eyes on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 9:32 AM

What the f...... how many times do you have to be told you can not fund building a new school with a sales tax period that is the law.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 9:04 AM

jownby, this plan wasn't democrat or republican, it was community. you have been on here completely saturating this site with ramblings and thesaurus type descriptions of what you think this town needs. we already have a crime and drug problem in this area and it absolutely has nothing to do with where conagra sits, or whether or not a 16 year old can park on his school lot. the SCCC needs to be adjoining to the high school because that is what makes up its daily students, my 6 year old doesnt take wood shop, someones 17 year old does. the parking lot...is full everyday, now i could see if it was 2/3rds empty everyday but its not and the involvement of sports in a childs life has never had anything but a positive influence on their future, whether they went on to play sports or just remember what a team is. i dont mean to focus strictly on what you have posted but i have read what all are saying and yours, for some reason pokes me, i dont know why but i do know this, this town will be as great as the people that are in allow it to be and if only 2000+ people got out to vote then that sir/maam is proof , at this moment of how outnumbered the ones that really care(for it or against it) are.

-- Posted by thisguy on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 8:58 AM

Losing ConAgra wasn't the demise of Carrollton, nor would it be for Marshall. (I'd like to know the percentage of native Saline countians working there and also the percentage of Saline countians looking for work)

Carrollton is doing just fine. Their "industrial district" has a lot more going on than Marshall's does. And they just finished building a very nice elementary complex. They managed to fit it in nicely on the existing high school property. Now granted...they don't have thousands of square feet of finely manicured landscape for teachers and students to gaze upon...but they do have a nice, new school building.

So now begin your "well, Carrollton is a lot smaller, etc, etc garbage". Yes they are, but they managed to find a way to make it happen and we have not.

-- Posted by outsider on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 8:56 AM

also...Eric, could you please tell me when the school board is elected next....i think my name is going in that hat!!!

-- Posted by thisguy on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 8:46 AM

Lets sit back and look at this and see what it had done to our community. This bond, like gal stated was the only bond in missouri to fail for schools, is there an underlying reason for this? was the logistics for the other bonds similar or entirely different to ours and if so can we be in touch with those school districts and use their plans as a map to our treasure? Maybe a new school building on business 65 isn't what we need, but a new school is and i think we need to look at the people behind the process, all of them, from start to finish. Independence passed 85 million in school bonds, but they are building two, yes two new schools and making renovations to i think two exisitng buildings. now i know and everyone else should agree that cost of living( taxes) are much higher in independence and if they can build 2 schools and renovate two for 85 million then i think we should look at the estimates we have gotten and go from there.

also, the sports complex cant be moved and it is what we have needed, we dont need to pay mo valley to use their facilities, we needed our own, but does bueker really need a football field and tennis courts? they use the park for any competitions, so why no build a new elementary school, k-4, two story on the land we already own? then as soonas the new elementary is open, move all the bueker kids to the exisitng 4 schools and tear that building down and construct a new junior high in its place, there is no possible way tyhat doing this with land we already own could cost the tax payers more to do than what they got in the city and if this firm that we have signed under wont do it for us at a reasonable price then we pay them and send them packing or we don't and we keep missing the boat, the ark that would save our children from drowning

-- Posted by thisguy on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 8:45 AM

Hey oustide

Maybe it's because the people here see the folly in spending 20 MILLION bucks to service only THREE GRADES. Combine that with a terrible location and that folks here are taxed out. Maybe on the next bond issue they should seriously consider a sales tax as opposed to a property tax.

I'll ask again. Why was to court house good enough to save but not our current school buildings?

-- Posted by What the f...... on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 8:35 AM

JOwnby,

The school district has very little money in the entire sports complex as most of the money was raised by either the Marshall Booster Club or private donation's so I don't think it would be a very good idea to slap the people that did all that work or donated the money in the face by getting rid of it.

And there is not enough room to build all that is needed.

The rest of your idea would cost the district way more money to replace than it would cost to buy land and build a new building in my opinion.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 8:30 AM

JOwnby

Just to make sure that I understand,

tear down the stadium, the Saline County Career Center, parking lots, and District Office and use that land for the new school? And how much money does the district have invested in those buildings? Just demolish and start over? Sell/give back the land away where the old elementary schools sit? Where will high school students park? Talk about community conjestion with them parking on the street, oh well. And then rent Valley's stadium? What about the services provided by the Saline County Career Center, just do away with them too?

And while we are at it, lets take a slam at one of Marshall's largest employers, ConAgra. Lets get them to move and them where will this town be?

Look at how Carrollton has grown after they left there? Some fun huh?

-- Posted by Red Witch on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 8:20 AM

Six years ago, it was going to cost 11 million for grades K-4, today's price tag for 3 grades is 20+ million. What will it be in another 5 or 6 years? How can you call that being fiscally responsibile? In the meantime, we keep patching up the old buildings, pouring more and more money into them. Fiscal responsibility?! Please!!

The message remains that we do not care about the educational needs of our students nor apparently about the need to attract new businesses to the community.

An example of fiscal responsibility or living within our means? I think not.

-- Posted by Red Witch on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 7:43 AM

The people of this town make it so embarrassing to live here. I am so frustrated with the mentality of people here! If some one could enlighten me as to why the people here are the way they are, I would appreciate it. Maybe it's in the water.............

-- Posted by outsidelookin'in on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 7:34 AM

jebbs,

A few years ago we were told if we only had an 18-hole golf course that it would attract businesses.

I sure don't remember that I would like to know where you got this information.

-- Posted by Gal66 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 7:10 AM

Ok jebbs,

Fill us all in on something that makes sense can you do that?

-- Posted by Gal66 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 6:56 AM

Couple of points the people in Marshall that voted this down are either the smartest people or the dumbest people in the state of Missouri, we had the only school bond issue that did not pass in the state!!!!!

The thing that we as people in Marshall should be the most ashamed of is that only 2451 people saw a need to vote!!!!!

Sad to say this but I just don't see a new school being built in this town in my remaining life time and I am only 50 years old!

Eric or anyone else how many registered voters are in Marshall that should have voted in this election?

-- Posted by Gal66 on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 6:53 AM

I get sick of people saying that new business is not going to come to Marshall because of the schools. A few years ago we were told if we only had an 18-hole golf course that it would attract businesses. I voted against it because I felt that it was a rush job and not well thought out. A few years ago we lost the neighborhood schools. At that time there was a huge outcry against it but the board did not listen. Now a fortune is spent each year on bussing children. Exactly how much does it cost the district to pay for the busses, gas for the busses, cost of the driver's and the insurance? Maybe look at not bussing and use that money better. I think that the day the school board understands "need to have" as opposed to "nice to have" that they will figure out a way to build the schools at a cost that is reasonable. I have had several teachers say that repairs haven't been made that should be made to the current schools in hopes that the condition of the schools would convince people we need new schools. The voters have spoken - give us something that makes sense and we will support it -

-- Posted by jebbs on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 6:27 AM

I am glad this didn't pass. This was never for the kids anyway. It was for the teachers. It doesn't matter where the kids are being taught, it's the quality the teachers possess that are teaching our kids. What is so terrible about the buildings that house the children now? What is in them that is making our children not learn?

-- Posted by get a clue on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 2:15 AM

Looks like Independence overwhelmingly passed $85 Million worth of bonds (68% to 32%), and Springfield also passed $50 worth of bonds (65% to 35%):

http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/1547...

http://springfieldpublicschoolsmo.org/AC...

http://www.news-leader.com/article/20091...

....perhaps the most sad part of the KC Star article:

"The district (Independence) hasn't built an elementary school since 1980, and 70 percent of its elementary schools are operating at or over capacity."

1980? That would be the cream of the crop around here!

-- Posted by fvsol on Wed, Nov 4, 2009, at 12:06 AM

I don't know how many times we can patch these relics. We have done major patch jobs at least twice since the early 90s. They already need them again. Not a good investment. By the way, our high school is 33 years old and Northwest is 41 years old. They will soon be in need of major overhauls too. People, get your heads out of the sand. It's way past time. Oh and the other school districts in the state will be sending us a thank you card for sending our piece of the stimulus package to them.

-- Posted by oneofmany on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 11:37 PM

OK I don't live in Marshall anymore, so I didn't vote. I just wanted to say a few things. I'm not trying to start a debate; I just want to explain my view looking from the outside.

First of all I hear that this was going to be paid for with an increase in home owners' taxes. Most people are struggling to hang on to their house right now so to increase the tax would not help those people.

Second, I think a new school would be good. I also think teachers need pay raises! With that being said, the money has to come from taxes. Unemployment is at 10%! That means less people making money which results in fewer taxes from income taxes and sales tax in the community, county, state and federal governments. How can we keep spending money when every government from feds to local is in debt and over spending already? I guess my point is if the government stops spending so much, we would have more money for schools and the important things!

My final comment is about the "free stimulus money"! I dislike Bush and Obama for their stimulus giving. This money is not free! If the bond would have passed and Marshall would have taken the 6 million in "free money" I would understand. I mean if the fed wants to give me 6 million I sure would take it. I could also give you names of about 25 people that the 6 million Marshall wanted to take has put out of work. The contract I work under used to be about 11 million dollars. The government pays us to help the military. After all of the stimulus money, our contract has been reduced to between 4 and 5 million. Congress told the boss man to make cuts because we have to pay for the stimulus plans. The good news is that the stimulus made 2 maybe even 4 jobs. Yeah they are converting some of us from contractors to government workers. 25 jobs lost, 2 maybe even 4 jobs gained. In Washington that's considered 4 jobs created or saved instead of 25 lost. Oh well, next time you hear of stimulus money being spent just think of the person or people that lost their job for it!

Sorry I wrote so much!

Thanks for listing,

CJ

-- Posted by cjay on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 11:22 PM

How are you so sure $20 Million could "fix up" everything K-8 in the district? Are you privy to that information? I doubt it.

If I had to guess, I'd say there's no chance that $20MM could fix all of the issues and conditions our schools are currently sitting in. In fact, I bet it's not even close.

-- Posted by fvsol on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 11:05 PM

Oops, I shouldn't have skimmed the article. I just reread it and found the answer to my own question. Never mind!

-- Posted by oneofmany on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 10:47 PM

20 million bucks to service only 3 grades? Who's missing the point here? Every other year we would have a new bond issue for yet another new school. This proposal solved nothing. 20 million bucks could have fixed up and added permanent classrooms to what we already own and serviced all the grades K-8. Why did we just spend a butt load of money to fix up the court house? Why was it worthy? It's time to go back to neighborhood schools. I have never heard anyone give any specific reason other than neighborhood schools no longer "feasable". Why is that,specifically? How much has this town grown in the last thirty years? I think it would be terribly unfair to label those who voted against the measure as folks who don't care about the kids. Maybe the best thing we can do for our kids is to show an example of how to make the most of what we already have in times like these. There are alot of new things I would like to have too but I am perfectly happy to make do with what I already have and I'm thankful to have it.

-- Posted by What the f...... on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 10:47 PM

Is the stimulus money available for the entire school year or for the calendar year?

-- Posted by oneofmany on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 10:44 PM

Intrigued, this is not an issue of the school district living within their means. You need to understand how the law dictates schools finance these projects. The current administration and our teachers are fiscally conservative, but that is NOT how buildings are built. It is going to take commitment from our community to make this happen.

As for the stimulus money, Marshall just lost out on $6,000,000 that some other community is going to get. Shame on us!

-- Posted by oneofmany on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 10:43 PM

BMSmom...don't worry about getting the north side of town cleaned up. In a few years it will all be graveled ConAgra parking lots and they'll be all nice and pretty.

back on topic...it's a shame something can't get done about the school situation. I gotta say that I never did figure out exactly what would be built and what would be replaced or closed. It seemed to change from time to time. I understand that time was critical, but you can't blame people for wanting to be sure of what they were voting on. Also, I'm not convinced that everyone was all that thrilled with the chosen site. It's too bad that such a poor job of planning has been done through the years. There's lots of open space on the high school block...if the buildings would have been spaced a little differently. Look down on the area on Google Earth sometime.

-- Posted by outsider on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 10:39 PM

You are naive to believe that new schools don't attract business. New schools also attract workers looking to relocate for employment. Industries thoroughly research the infrastructure of the communities they are interested in doing business in. In order to successfully attract new industry there first must be enough citizens available to fill newly created jobs, then there must be the potential for attracting new employees from other communities for company growth and expansion. Are these existing schools an attractive prospect to businesses and their future employees? We must invest in Marshall's future if we want this community to survive and thrive.

-- Posted by born-n-raised on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 9:53 PM

Getting more jobs here? Improving the disgraceful conditions of your schools would have been a step in the right direction, so good luck with that. When I moved here three years ago, I felt fortunate my daughter was too old to sit in a 40-year-old trailer with no bathroom in it for her "classroom."

This is a very sad day for this community. A better opportunity to take an enormous leap forward for education will not come again, at least not soon.

-- Posted by Kathy Fairchild on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 9:37 PM

While, I'll agree that Marshall hasn't attracted any businesses the last several years, I don't agree that you can attribute that to the school buildings. The building themselves may not be the most perfect situation, but I feel we have some excellent teachers in our district. If we could get some new businesses to town, then the tax burden would be somewhat more feasible.

-- Posted by intrigued on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 9:24 PM

As a proponent for education, I am saddened to see this bond issue fail. However, as a supporter of the democratic process, the majority has spoken and this proposal was not the one for us to go with.

That being said. I urge those individuals who opposed the bond issue to speak up and voice the reason for their NO vote. Do not hide behind the curtain or lurk in the shadows and vote ANY proposition down just because it means "Change".

Get informed about the REAL answers to your questions. Stop being a cog in the wheel of misinformation and rumor. Get informed.

I have been in heated discussions. I have read each article and I have forced myself to read each blog entry. Quite frankly it sickens me to see ill informed comments and excuses in attempts to block progress. For example, I have heard and seen many times, people object to the location stating that the board should purchase the old shopping area. Well that is NOT an option. You can not purchase something that is not for sale. I have also seen other locations mentioned as "better" options. But, if those posible locations are crossed out due to overhead power lines, too small of acreage per student ratio, locations that were availabe before may not be now, or any other reason, those possibilities are off the table. You can suggest them here all day long, but it is not an option, stop suggesting it over and over and over.

Another suggestion that was made was to tear down the current stadium and build the site there. That just does not make sence. To invest all that money and then demolish it just to build a building and then rent space at valley? Come on!

If you can recall, the district had the chance to purchase the property where the shopping mall and the community bank sit now, but the bond issue was defeated since "we'd never be big enough to use all of that land."

We as a community have shot ourselves in the foot time after time after time. You want bandaids when tournaquits are necessary.

You speak of how it's teachers that make education possible, not walls. Well, if that was 100% true, why don't we still have one room school houses? It's both! Good quality teachers in good quality buildings. You can not teach kids today's educational lessons in buildings that can not support the electrical and technological capacities or has gaps in walls and windows that allow the outside weather in.

Face it, we need to put up or accept what is coming down the road. We can do something to better our schools and community OR the state can come in, and they will, and they will tell us that we WILL spend our money on school improvements and they will tell us how to do it.

Do you want the option of having a say in how our money is spent or do you want a politician in Jeff City telling us how we will spead our educational dollars?

-- Posted by Greg House on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 9:22 PM

WHEN will be able to afford it? The price tag for an entire elementary complex (all 4 grades plus kindergarten) 6 years ago was 11 million. Now the price tag for 3 grades is 20+ million. WHEN exactly are we going to be able to afford it?! Meanwhile, my taxpaying dollars are going hand over fist in repairing school buildings that are falling down around themselves. This speaks so poorly of our community. Every surrounding community has passed a school bond in recent years. Those communities will be able to use those schools to attract new business. Marshall hasn't attracted any significant business in years. The shortsightedness of many of this town's citizens never fails to amaze me.

-- Posted by born-n-raised on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 9:15 PM

Way to go Slater....I'm proud

-- Posted by moodyblue on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 9:03 PM

Red Witch, with all due respect, I don't know if the message that is sent should be that "we", taxpayers, are sending a message of "we don't care", but more a message of, this is called fiscal responsibility. Although everyone is proclaiming the greatness of this "free" stimulus money, I think we need to remember that there is no such thing as "free" money. We have got to learn to live within our means and with what we have until we can afford to create something new that can be enjoyed because it can be afforded.

-- Posted by intrigued on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 8:37 PM

One word: Bummer

-- Posted by weasel2htm on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 8:36 PM

What a sad day for the students of Marshall! The message that we are sending to the students is that we do not care about your educational needs. Poor schools do not attract businesses to come into our community. How tragic!

-- Posted by Red Witch on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 8:31 PM

now the city can work on getting more jobs in here and start cleaning up the north side of town

-- Posted by BMSmom on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 8:31 PM

Good

-- Posted by yank on Tue, Nov 3, 2009, at 8:19 PM


Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account on this site, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.