By MaryHelen Swanson
On the heels of the failed levy referendum earlier this month, the North Branch school board, last week, moved through a lengthy discussion of another attempt in 2010.

There was agreement that an operating levy is needed.

That agreement was not as complete, however, when it came to making a decision that night to direct administration to move ahead with a referendum in 2010.

As the discussion opened, Superintendent Dr. Deb Henton said if the board is going to move forward, more time is necessary, rather than less.

It’s not a bad thing to tell the public you need a levy, she said, and have not yet determined the questions.

As she has done before, Dr. Henton stressed the importance of a unified board if they move forward with another levy.

Henton said the board would need to be as transparent as possible, meaning if they know they are going for a levy, they must tell the people at the time they make that decision.

Supt. Henton said, as she did a week earlier, that the need for the resources (that would be garnered from the levy) has not changed at all. “It did not evaporate overnight with the failure of the levy,” she said, adding, “we still have large class sizes, we still have a projected deficit, we still have flat funding from the legislature and we still have declining enrollment.”

“That said,” she went on, “I know how difficult it will be to pass an operating levy in a general election year, which is next year.”

But the superintendent said she also had people step forward on Nov. 4 asking the district to go for a levy again.

Dr. Henton pointed to the district’s vision statement: “Inspire dreams, build integrity and instill hope in our students, our staff, our families and our communities.”

She believes it is essential to instill hope in the kids, the staff and the community by going back and asking for the resources that are needed.

She noted that morale is very low in the school district right now.

Board chairwoman Kim Salo noted how important is is to keep the communication going rather than wait until next July. She feels the community engagement groups, which the board has decided to start in December, will be very valuable.

At left: Barb Mork, left, and Charley  were recognized at the NB school board meeting last week for their efforts as co-chairpersons of the SOS Vote Yes committee for the Nov. 3 levy referendum. To honor them, Kim Salo, as chairwoman, presented them with school bells and a certificate on behalf of the school board. Photos by MaryHelen Swanson

But board member Vicki McDougall was concerned with the timing, being only two weeks out of the failed election.

She said the board has to be cautious, even as the members understand they don’t have a choice in going with another levy.

She was leery about a decision being a knee jerk reaction, and didn’t want to alienate the fence  sitters.

Board member Donna Setter believed it was necessary to communicate the need better, saying apparently they didn’t do as good of a job educating the public on the need as they thought.

Salo said it was the board’s job to address the needs of the school district, to decide what that need is and to let the people decide if they want to support it.

But McDougall felt it important to listen to the “no” voters as well as the “yes” voters, while understanding there were a lot of people on the fence.

She just wasn’t comfortable making a decision in two weeks.

She did say she would vote yes, again, however.

 Salo didn’t think the public said “the district didn’t need the money,” the need, she said, has not changed and is not going away.

Setter said it is important to find the level that the community can support, that’s what she hopes will come from the engagement groups.

Member John White agreed with McDougall about the timing. And he believes there was a big chasm between the yes and no voters.

At left: On behalf of the North Branch VFW Auxiliary to Post 6424, Valerie Nelson, left, presented school board chairwoman Kim Salo with a POW flag for use at the Sunrise school where students have been learning about POW Day.

He said he would support going for a levy again, but if the voters see that two weeks after the election the board is going for the same thing they rejected, it will say the board is not listening.

Member Jeanne Walz favored the longer time frame, saying the earlier the board gets started the better, even if it is not popular.

She felt it was, however, important to ask the community what it needed from the district.

And that’s what board member Kirby Ekstrom  stressed, the importance of getting as much community input as possible.

He said the board needs to get the information out about what it takes to run the schools. People need to better understand the budget and how it works, he said.

White agreed with Ekstrom, that if the board says it’s going for a levy this night, what is it asking for? He believed that making that decision would be showing the board was not listening to the people.

But what if all we get in the next month or two is negative, said Salo, and we go ahead and run a levy again, what is that saying?

Ekstrom said the results of the failed levy said “my income does not sustain that amount” so it is imperative to learn what that level would be.

Salo said she didn’t understand the postponement of a decision, but she strongly believed in a 6-0 vote.

Still, she reminded the others that this is not a knee jerk reaction, the board has known for years of the need, and it’s not going to change, she added.

She said she wanted full board support so the process could begin.

The board the agreement was there on the need, and as noted earlier, but not a final commitment on a referendum as yet.

The first community engagement group will meet on Dec. 3 and the board agreed that the topic will be alternative schedules. Other topics in coming months may be alternative delivery (of education), transportation/fees and activity fees and other fees. One group will meet each month.

---

Comments (0)