Brookings School District follwed it's alphabet tonight

By -
I'm told that tonight, the Brookings School District passed resolutions against both Amendment D - the property tax amendment, and Amendment E.... Which one is that?

Oh yes, the one I spend at least 1/5 of my time railing on about. The Amendment which arose from people who are against a few things such as: government, taxes, the New World Order, water flouridation, marriage licenses, and a plethora of other things.

Yes, my friends led by Ron Branson, Bill Stegmeier and Bonnie Russell got shot down in a resolution by the Brookings School Board tonight. I'm told it came after the helpful and informative video produced and provided by the No-on-E people.

Also - here's a newstip for you that you haven't heard yet - apparently a wealthy Brookings businessman wants to do a "Denny Sanford" and make a charitable donation to the School District which will be valued in the MILLIONS before it's done.

It was publicly discussed in the meeting tonight, but I'll let the MSM and the school district come out with it officially because I only have sketchy details.

Suffice it to say that if it comes to fruition, it could mean a new school and a science museum - any way you look at it, it's a major deal for the school kids and the district itself.

No on E and a major benefactor. Not a bad night.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I can understand Brookings not wanting amendment D. Their local effort (property taxes for k-12)are decreasing at almost twice the rate of the state average. Must be hard living in the poor old dying town of Brookings where the assessed value of all their property is decreasing so rapidly.
If D passes they might have to pull their own weight like the averge South Dakotan does !!
4:36 AM
Anonymous said…
PP -

FYI. We held a session on ballot initiatives, Amendment E included, at our conference last week.

Since then, Belle Fourche, Spearfish, Parker and now Brookings have confirmed to have passed resolutions, and I'll wager that alot more will take action at their September or August board meeting.

Good stuff.
8:43 AM
Anonymous said…
PP,

I know they may be politically undefensible, but there are some serious logical arguments against having the state be involved with marriage liscencing and flouridation of water, much less the current tax structure.

That being said, Amendment E is ludicrous.
12:57 PM
Anonymous said…
Brookings School Board members will not influence my thinking on Amendment D. As a voter, I am able to think for myself and don't need their help.
6:08 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A note from Benedict Ar... Sorry. A note from Stan Adelstein why he thinks you should vote Democrat this year.

By -
Image
(Click on letter to enlarge) And while it may not be printed at taxpayer expense, I don't see a disclaimer, either. When they hold the special session (supposedly at the end of November) , since he's left them already, I think his colleagues should expel him from the caucus. Sure. At that point it's only going to be symbolic. But since he's already said he's running again in the near future, sometimes symbolism is enough.
Read more

Corson County information on Klaudt Rape Charges

By -
Here's some of the information on the Corson County Charges: COUNT I That on or about December of 2005, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT II That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT III That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration, separate and distinct from the act alleged in Count II, with
Read more

It's about health, not potential promiscuity.

By -
As the only South Dakota blogger out with 5 daughters, I feel I need to weigh in on the whole discussion that's occurring with regards to the HPV vaccine, and Governor Rounds' proposal to make it available. My family (including my three oldest girls) watched my mom, their grandmother, succumb slowly and painfully to cancer which spread throughout her body. If a similar fate from a different type of cancer was preventable through a simple shot, why wouldn't anyone advocate for it? At the age most of my kids are going to be getting it, they're still playing with barbies, and negative influences such as most of the programming on MTV, and other assorted trashy television is verboten in my house. All they're going to know about this vaccination is that it's a shot, just like for teatnus or measles. They'll go "Ow, I don't want a shot," and that will be it. Just another mark on their vaccination record. One check box for DPT, one for HPV, and so on
Read more