Home Blog Page 169

News for 3-23-2023 (e-edition)

This Week's Issue

Garretson home prices have increased significantly over the past few years, which has affected property assessments; the preliminary results from the opt out election are in with a 344-277 vote in favor; and the Minnehaha County Commission finalized the letter regarding CO2 pipelines to be sent to the Public Utilities Commission, plus more!

You can receive your newspaper through email!

The Garretson Gazette sends a weekly email letting you know when this week's issue is available, along with a run-down of each week's articles. Please ensure you enter our email address () into your "safe emails" list and subscribe to our email newsletter using the form below. Thanks!

Enter your email to receive our weekly news updates!

Submitting...

Thank you for signing up!


This Week's Spotlight Photos


Latest Articles

Legion Scholarships available:

            The Garretson American Legion Auxiliary is awarding annually two (2) $300.00 scholarship applicable to all college, and technical school or post--high school training to assist Auxiliary or Legion members' child/step-child or grandchild/step-grandchild to secure an education beyond the high school level. Eligibility is the applicant must be a child or grandchild of an Auxiliary or Legion member of the Henry G. Fix Unit or Post.

            The applicant must not be under sixteen (16) years of age or over twenty-two (22) years of age. The applicant who has previously been awarded this scholarship is ineligible. Please contact Kathy Evenson at 605 941-4699 for an application. The deadline for submission is April 1, 2023.

Jesse James Days Vendor Booth, Food and Activity Planning for June 16-18 (Fri-Sun) is business as usual in 2023.

            Celebrate as a City and with the Garretson Commercial Club this year at Jesse James Days by enjoying the long -awaited sound system on Main St!

            GCC Leadership teams will reach out to past participants and volunteers in March. New to town or to participating? Contact a Board Member.

All are highly encouraged to contact them ASAP for preferred days and times on the schedule in the following areas.

Saturday’s Vendor Fair at the American Legion: $10 per table. With no “dub up’s”. It’s a first come first serve reservation to keep the event full. Checks or Money Orders should be sent to: Laurie Bennett, PO Box 613, Garretson, SD 57030.

            FOOD: Non-Profit’s and restaurants that plan to provide food near or on Main St., at the Park, or Car Show – please contact Leslie Black 605-839-9405 or to apply, avoid overbooking, and support area businesses, nonprofits and members.

            Volunteers and Participants: An event like Jesse James Day’s needs both- consider spending a few hours helping serve on your favorite activity.  Team leaders will be reaching out after the, 12 pm, Wed. March 22nd Special Meeting of the GCC at The Combine.

            Businesses, residents and GCC members are encouraged to reach out to board members via phone or email for ideas and support. Contact info for Board Members is found at: https://visitgarretsonsd.com/commercial-club-board/ or FB page:  https://www.facebook.com/GarretsonCommercialClub/

South Dakota congressman advocates
expansion of work requirements for food aid

0

by Adam Goldstein, South Dakota Searchlight

            WASHINGTON — Republican South Dakota Rep. Dusty Johnson introduced a bill Tuesday aimed at expanding work requirements for federal nutrition aid, reigniting a perennial conflict over how Congress navigates both the farm bill and federal spending.

            “Work is the best pathway out of poverty,” Johnson, who in his home state has talked about growing up poor, said in a Tuesday statement. “Work requirements have proven to be effective, and people who can work should work. With more than 11 million open jobs, there are plenty of opportunities for SNAP recipients to escape poverty and build a better life.”

Rep Dusty Johnson
photo courtesy Rep Dusty Johnson

            The America Works Act of 2023, if passed, would require able-bodied adults without dependents ages 18 through 65 to work or participate in a work training or education program for at least 20 hours per week to receive continuous support from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

            As of now, that work requirement only applies to able-bodied adults without dependents ages 18 through 49.

            If SNAP recipients under current law do not meet these work requirements, they are only eligible to receive nutrition benefits for three months over the course of three years. This SNAP “time limit” was suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic, but will return in May when the White House announces the end of the public health emergency.

            If passed, Johnson’s bill would affect the roughly 1.36 million able-bodied adults enrolled in SNAP that reported zero dollars in gross income in 2020, according to pre-pandemic data cited by Johnson.

            Average monthly SNAP benefits per enrollee in 2022 were roughly $230, or just over $7 per day, including emergency pandemic nutrition benefits. The total cost of all SNAP benefits administered in 2022 was roughly $149 billion.

            Johnson’s legislation would also remove states’ ability to request a waiver for the work requirement from the Department of Agriculture if states lack enough available jobs to hire enrollees. In the Tuesday release, Johnson’s team said the change would close this “loophole” that many states “abuse” to get out of SNAP work requirements.

            The bill would not affect states that request work requirement waivers because they have a 10% or greater unemployment rate.

            The bill’s 23 co-sponsors in the House, all Republicans, include:

•          Rep. Chuck Edwards of North Carolina

•          Rep Warren Davidson of Ohio

•          Rep. Jake Ellzey of Texas

•          Rep. Mary Miller of Illinois

•          Rep. Doug Lamborn of Colorado

•          Rep. August Pfluger of Texas

•          Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer of Oregon

•          Rep. Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma

•          Rep. Jen Kiggans of Virginia

•          Rep. Randy Feenstra of Iowa

•          Rep. Troy Nehls of Texas

•          Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana

•          Rep. Mark Alford of Missouri

•          Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee

•          Rep. Max Miller of Ohio

•          Rep. Pat Fallon of Texas

•          Rep. Virginia Foxx of North Carolina

•          Rep. Randy Weber of Texas

•          Rep. Glen Grothman of Wisconsin

•          Rep. Tim Walberg of Michigan

•          Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina

•          Rep. Scott Franklin of Florida

•          Rep. Michael Cloud of Texas

            The bill comes after contentious congressional hearings on updates to the Thrifty Food Plan, one of four food plans the USDA develops to estimate the cost of a healthy diet. The plan is directly tied to SNAP benefit allocations.

            The USDA updated the plan in 2021, after receiving authorization to do so in the 2018 farm bill. The adjusted Thrifty Food Plan, which went into effect in 2021, boosted SNAP allocations by an average of 40 cents per meal for every enrollee.

            Republicans in Congress note that the changes are expected to add $250 billion in costs to the program between 2023 and 2031.

            Congressional Democrats, in contrast, argue that the elevated numbers represent an overdue improvement to the program, especially with pandemic-era food assistance expiring in 32 states and for more than 30 million people this month.

            The extra pandemic funding, which has been in place for the last three years, has provided low-income households on SNAP with another roughly $95 per month, on average. Individual SNAP recipients have received a boost of $90 per month, on average.

            “We remain unified in opposition to any cuts to SNAP or the nutrition title and to any further restrictions on beneficiaries,” wrote Democratic Rep. Jahana Hayes of Connecticut in a letter to the House Budget Committee on Tuesday, which was co-signed by all Democratic House Agriculture Committee members.

            “We agree that additional resources are necessary to further improve our already strong anti-hunger safety net. A robust nutrition title is key to enacting a bipartisan Farm Bill this year.”

            Democratic Reps. Barbara Lee of California and Alma Adams of North Carolina introduced a bill on March 10 with 19 co-sponsors which would remove the time limit entirely for able-bodied adults without dependents.

            The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps, serves more than 40 million enrollees and is projected to cost roughly $127 billion in 2023. The program will see a $22 billion drop in total expenditures this year as pandemic nutrition benefits expire.

            South Dakota Searchlight is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. South Dakota Searchlight maintains editorial independence.

Criminal justice bills passed in 2023
described as ‘just a start’ for lawmakers

0

Rehabilitation programs seen as next step

By John Hult, South Dakota Searchlight

            The recently concluded legislative session emphasized and funded criminal justice to an extent not seen in a decade, but according to some prosecutors and lawmakers, it’s just the start of reforms.

            The focus next year, they say, should be on rehabilitation.

            “We’ve had legislators who have reached out and have already said, ‘Hey, what can we start working on for next year?’” said Minnehaha County State’s Attorney Daniel Haggar.

            Lawmakers convened for their annual session in January and finished Thursday, except for a day set aside on March 27 to consider vetoed bills. Not since former Gov. Dennis Daugaard’s reform efforts in 2013 had the Legislature focused so closely on criminal justice.

            Among other updates to public safety laws, such as enhancing the penalty for attempted murder of a law enforcement officer, legislators passed:

•          A bill to upend the state’s parole system for 23 violent offenses under the banner of “truth in sentencing,” potentially costing the state millions in incarceration expenses,

•          Another potentially costly proposal to set mandatory minimum sentences for anyone convicted of four or more driving under the influence violations, and,

•          Two bills that allocate around $400 million for a new women’s prison in Rapid City and a replacement facility for the South Dakota State Penitentiary in Sioux Falls.

Lawmakers ponder rehab programs

            Haggar helped draft the truth in sentencing bill, which was sponsored by Sioux Falls Republicans Brent Hoffman in the Senate and Sue Peterson in the House.

            During a press conference to discuss 2022 crime statistics in Sioux Falls last week, Haggar called the bill “a good first step.” The next step will be to bolster rehabilitation programs behind the prison walls, particularly for nonviolent offenders.

            Haggar is hopeful that will happen next year, because legislators are already asking about it.

            “That’s a golden opportunity for us,” Haggar said. “ And hopefully, we’re going to be able to make some real impact on rehabilitation as well.”

            Hoffman would like to improve rehabilitation and community transition in upcoming legislative sessions, as well. The new prisons will help, he said, since the current outdated or overcrowded facilities make it difficult for the Department of Corrections to offer coursework for inmates. 

            The women’s prison in Pierre is so full that space for drug treatment is severely limited. The additional women’s prison in eastern Rapid City, set to begin construction soon and open in 2024, will free up space to resume rehabilitation coursework. The men’s facility, meanwhile, at an as-yet undetermined location in or near Sioux Falls, will ease crowding for some men’s facilities and offer flexibility for programming and placement.

            The penitentiary was designed for an era when inmates were expected to sit in cells for 22 hours a day.

            “We’re largely limited within the Sioux Falls men’s penitentiary by simple logistics, building structure, and a multi-story building that doesn’t lend itself to those kinds of things,” Hoffman said. “There simply isn’t space.”

            Hoffman would also like to make it easier for paroled inmates to return to their home areas. Inmates often stay in Sioux Falls after release for its wealth of employment opportunities and broad range of social service programs. The Banquet offers free daily meals, there are several temporary work agencies that hire felons, and the city has halfway houses like the Glory House or the Arch to help them step slowly back into society from supervision.

            Hoffman said legislation to encourage the expansion of services to more rural areas or partnerships to expand existing programs could aid in community transition and prevent Sioux Falls from being the default choice for post-incarceration parole planning.

            With the right programming and supervision in place, Hoffman said, the state could reach a place for parolees where “you aren’t just released in Sioux Falls, you are transported and transitioned and assisted with relocating back to your home on record.”

Specialty courts encouraged with DUI penalties

            Rehabilitation will be top of mind for Rep. Chris Karr, R-Sioux Falls, too. Karr, whose grandmother was struck by and killed by a drunken driver with multiple convictions in 2019, spearheaded mandatory minimums for DUIs this session.

            It was the second year he moved to stiffen the penalties for repeat offenders, but this time he was convinced to adjust the verbiage to encourage the use of DUI courts prior to a sentence. He also added provisions for post-conviction supervision.

            Karr told South Dakota Searchlight he shifted his thinking after discussions with representatives from the Unified Judicial System. DUI courts defer felony DUI sentences in exchange for intensive monitoring and weekly court sessions that last at least 18 months. The sessions play out like support group meetings, where positive peer pressure from other participants is coupled with incentives and encouragement from a judge.

            Those courts have an 80% success rate in terms of reducing recidivism, Karr learned. Evidence-based programs that can improve public safety for less money – probation and parole are significantly less costly than incarceration – often make more sense for taxpayers, Karr said.

            “The work is not done,” Karr said. “At the end of the day, we want to address serial offenders. If we can do that through rehabilitation … that’s what we want.”

Nonviolent crime rate dropping

            Expansion of specialty courts for DUIs, drug users, veterans and people with mental illness was a pillar of Daugaard’s 2013 criminal justice reform package. Other rehab and diversion programs meant to keep offenders out of jail or prison if they do not pose serious risk to the public were bolstered in some jurisdictions by grant funding from groups like the Annie E. Casey Foundation and the MacArthur Foundation.

            Arrest rates for non-violent crimes over the past five years would suggest those efforts have paid off.

            Drunken driving arrests in Rapid City for the past three years have held steady at lower than the 10-year average, with the second-lowest arrest total for that time frame logged in 2022. DUI trends have been similar in Sioux Falls, and methamphetamine arrests continued a downward trend in both cities for 2022. Fentanyl arrests have increased in recent years, but the arrest numbers for that drug remain lower than arrests for meth.

            Drug arrests statewide have trended downward for at least five years, according to the latest report from the Division of Criminal Investigation.

            Diversion programs, pre-trial monitoring through the 24/7 sobriety program, and facilities for mental health holds are now so plentiful in Sioux Falls that Minnehaha County Sheriff Mike Milstead hasn’t sent a jail inmate out into the community to pick up trash or otherwise perform community service for five years.

            Low-risk inmates, sometimes called “trusties,” had performed such tasks in Sioux Falls for decades. At this point, Milstead said, the inmates who may have been trusties a decade ago are already on supervision in the community.

Beyond incarceration

            Per capita violent crime in Sioux Falls has ticked up since the pandemic. But non-violent crime – and even some violent crimes like rape – dropped in 2022.

            That’s a point that stuck with House Majority Leader Will Mortenson, R-Pierre. Mortenson was among the handful of House members who argued against the truth in sentencing bill.

            On the House floor, he pointed to the latest DCI report as proof that the bill was unnecessary.

Arrests for burglary, rape and other crimes are down, not up.

            “There are a lot of parts of our country that appear to be getting less safe, particularly in urban areas,” Mortenson said last week. “That really does not appear to be true in most of South Dakota, thankfully. We remain a very safe state.”

            The Hoffman bill had the support of sheriffs and prosecutors statewide, which made it difficult for lawmakers to side with him on the issue, Mortenson said late last week.

            He’s concerned about the potential cost of this year’s public safety bills, but said he’s hopeful his fellow legislators will return next year ready to consider approaches beyond lock and key.

            “It’s easy to say, ‘We’re mad at people for breaking the law, so let’s put them in prison forever. That’ll make sure they don’t commit these crimes any more,’” Mortenson said. “That’s the easy way. It just isn’t the effective way if what you’re looking for is public safety.”

South Dakota Searchlight is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. South Dakota Searchlight maintains editorial independence.

SD lags in “sunshine laws”

0

Media advocates say North Dakota and Minnesota "sunshine laws" generally work well to keep government open — but South Dakota lags behind its neighbors in open records and open meeting laws.

By Pat Springer

Editor's note: This is one in a series of news stories and editorials from Forum Communications in support of open government. Sunshine Week, which champions open government and celebrates access to public information, is March 12-18.

            FARGO — Valhalla is a rustic cabin tucked away near the Needles Highway in the heart of the Black Hills that serves as a retreat for South Dakota’s governor and her family, friends and guests.

            The 1½-story cabin features a large main room dominated by a massive stone fireplace and provides comfortable seating on bison leather-upholstered furniture on a site overlooking Grace Coolidge Creek.

            It’s owned by the state of South Dakota — whose taxpayers have spent $120,000 in upgrades — but the administration of Gov. Kristi Noem won’t disclose the Valhalla guest list, which South Dakota News Watch recently requested.

            As a result of the “hidden” guest list, it’s unclear if the cabin is being used for political purposes, South Dakota New Watch reported in a story that appeared in the Mitchell Republic .

            A lawyer for the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, which maintains the property, said “no such record exists as no list is maintained” — and also asserted that such a list, if kept, would be exempted under South Dakota open records law.

            In North Dakota, the state’s $8.5 billion Legacy Fund, a financial reserve that taps oil and gas revenues, has recently begun investing in ventures inside the state.

            So far, the fund has funneled $62.5 million into equity investments — but the state investment office will only divulge the five funds that it has invested in, withholding details about how much is being invested in each and how that money is being put to work in the state.

            The reason for the secrecy, according to the Retirement and Investment Office: The investments are exempted from open records law because they involve confidential business information .

            In Minnesota, the Modern Montessori Charter School in Champlin, a northern suburb of Minneapolis, gave notice of a special meeting last fall. The meeting, according to the notice, was for “preliminary consideration of allegations or charges against an individual subject to the board’s authority.”

            The special meeting entered executive session, with the board meeting behind closed doors. When the meeting reopened to the public, the board disclosed that it had fired the school’s director.

            “The Director and public school community was not informed, provided an agenda, nor given a reasonable expectation that a vote was going to occur based on the content of the special meeting notice and previous meeting precedent,” Minnesota’s Commissioner of Administration, which interprets the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, said in a Dec. 8, 2022, advisory opinion.

            The three examples illustrate how open records and open meetings laws, often referred to as “sunshine laws,” work to keep the workings of government transparent — within limitations that frustrate journalists trying to inform the public.

            North Dakota, South Dakota and Minnesota open records laws all provide that government records are presumed to be open to the public — unless exempted, which journalists and advocates say can provide loopholes that conceal important information.

            In North Dakota and Minnesota, media representatives said the laws protecting open records and open meetings are generally good and rank among the best in the country.

            “Generally speaking we're in good shape in the open records, open meetings law,” said Jack McDonald, a lawyer for the North Dakota Newspaper Association. “It’s accepted as fact that meetings and records are public. Now we’re fighting over the fringes.”

            One emerging fringe area: access to electronic messages on laptop computers, cellphones and other devices, which can involve emails, texts, chats or recordings of video teleconferences, he said.

            “I think the biggest challenge we’re facing now is technology,” McDonald said. Although the law is clear — electronic communications fall under open records law — the “practicalities” can be difficult to sort through, he said.

            Significantly, North Dakota is one of the few states that enshrines open records and open meetings law in the state constitution, McDonald said.

            Chad Koenen, co-owner of Henning Publications and president of the Minnesota Newspaper Association, said public access to records and meetings is generally good.

            “As a whole I think Minnesota is in pretty good shape in our open meetings and open records law,” he said.

            Still, Koenen added, “You need the people in power to actually follow the law.” Minnesota continually works to revise its open records and open meetings laws, said Koenen, whose company publishes the Citizens Advocate in Henning, New York Mills Dispatch and Frazee-Vergas Forum.

            Mark Anfinson, a lawyer for the Minnesota Newspaper Association, agrees that sunshine laws generally are working well in Minnesota. He also agrees that technology — especially communications on personal devices by public officials — poses increasing challenges.

            “It’s incredibly hard to detect that kind of evasion of the law,” Anfinson said. “There’s no easy way to do that.”

            Reporters covering a governmental body develop strong instincts, and sometimes are left with the impression that when an important issue comes up in a public meeting with little or no discussion, the discussion already occurred privately, often in emails or texts, he said.

            One possible partial remedy is to allow public officials to discuss issues on social media platforms, but require them to make those discussions open to the public, he said.

            In Minnesota, a common misperception is that the open meetings law requires that city and county commissions as well as school boards are obligated to allow members of the public to speak at meetings.

            That isn’t the case, Anfinson said, although many boards do allow public comments, with restrictions of time or content. Legislators are considering a requirement to allow for public comments.

Exemptions are the rule in South Dakota

            In South Dakota, the list of exemptions to the open records law is both long and, in some cases, broad, allowing officials the ability to withhold certain information, said David Bordewyk, executive director of the South Dakota Newspaper Association.

            One of the gaping exemptions involves written communications. “There is no authority under law to compel release of emails or correspondence,” Bordewyk said.

            Another roadblock is a law that keeps police investigation reports secret — even after a case has been decided or dismissed, unless an official decides to release the information or the case goes to court, he said.

            “It’s really hard to get information out of law enforcement,” Bordewyk said.

            One notable recent exception to the withholding of information from criminal investigations came in the case of former South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg, who was impeached and removed from office in 2022 after a car he was driving struck and killed a pedestrian walking along a highway.

            Before the legislative impeachment proceedings, Gov. Noem ordered the release of investigation records, including a video recording of Ravnsborg being interviewed by investigators.

            “That’s never happened before that I can recall,” said Bordewyk, who noted the case was high-profile, involving the conduct of a public official and of significant public interest. “You don’t see that happening at the local level or other statewide cases that I’m familiar with.”

            Fees charged by local governments can also make it difficult — or prohibitively expensive — to get public information, Bordewyck and others said.

            Minnehaha County, which includes Sioux Falls, is considering increasing its hourly fee for handling record requests from $15 to $50 — an increase of 233% — for instance. Fees can get exorbitantly high when lawyers review documents, Bordewyk said.

            “That obviously can become a barrier,” he said.

            Although journalists routinely use open records and open meetings laws, people shouldn’t forget that the open government laws are for everyone, Bordewyk said.

            “It’s all about the public’s right to know,” he said. “It’s not the media’s right to know.”

SUNSHINE ON GOVERNMENT IN SOUTH DAKOTA REQUIRES WORK

0

By David Bordewyk

            This week is Sunshine Week – a national observance of the importance of open government and the public’s right to know.

            As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis said more than a century ago: “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.” It is a proverb often cited by journalists and others when making a case for why transparency in government is important.

            Transparency about the workings of government proves effective in preventing corruption and misuse or abuse of tax dollars.

            In South Dakota, that sunlight on government often comes in three forms: open meetings, open records and public notices.

            Open meetings refer to the state laws that guide public boards such as school boards and city councils on when and how to promote and conduct their meetings in public.

            Open records refer to the laws that dictate on how government officials make available upon request to the public information kept in file cabinets, computer drives and in cyberspace.

            Public notices refer to the laws about what government – especially local governments – must publish in a local newspaper. Items such as meeting minutes, bid notices and proposed budgets.

            However, this three-legged stool for open government – open meetings, open records and public notices – is not without its weaknesses and faults, especially when it comes to open meetings and open records laws.

            The open meetings laws include provisions for when a public board may meet behind closed doors to discuss certain topics such as the conduct or performance of an employee or an ongoing lawsuit involving the public entity. Sometimes, the use of executive session by public boards is abused, either unwittingly or knowingly.

            The open records laws include a laundry list of exceptions for when public officials may deny someone’s request for information held by government. My experience has been government officials readily pick and choose from that laundry list of exceptions if they are not interested in complying with someone’s request for government information.

            To be fair, there are legitimate reasons why government officials should discuss certain topics behind closed doors or not release certain government records. Allowing a school board to meet in executive session to discuss its negotiating strategy for purchasing land for a new school building can serve to protect taxpayers from paying too much for the land. Personally identifiable information such as Social Security numbers and credit card information absolutely must be protected from public view when kept by government.

            Still, the weaknesses in our current open government laws cannot be overlooked. Executive sessions provisions in the open meetings laws are vague and ripe for abuse. The exceptions in the open records laws are too plentiful and too expansive.

            Work is needed to better educate public officials about these laws and to improve them through legislation – all easier said than done. Over the years we have seen improvements in our open government laws, but much more work is needed. We need more advocates and champions for open government in elected office, both locally and at the state level. We need you to be involved as well.

            Why? Because the sunshine Louis Brandeis was talking about does not come naturally.

            David Bordewyk is executive director for the South Dakota Newspaper Association, which represents the state’s weekly and daily newspapers.

Make sure to vote next week, and don’t sit out on any election cycle

-an editorial

            We’ve had a lot in the paper over the last several months on the Opt-Out. Frankly, we’ve had lot of news related to the school in our newspaper, both good and bad over the course of the 8 years I’ve been here at the paper.

            As the Opt-Out vote approaches, I want to talk turkey about a couple of issues. Whether you vote yes or no, understand why you’re doing it. Is the way you vote going to give you and the community the outcome you want?

            Here are my two cents. The last two election cycles have whizzed by without any contest for the people who filed election petitions. I’m not on social media personally. I hear, though, that it’s all the rage. It strikes me that if people were really concerned with how the school is run and how it spends its money, they might want to actually file petitions to get a seat on the school board. Every time there is an election cycle, there should be multiple people looking to get a seat on that board, if there is that much worry and anxiety about how our school is run. We haven’t had a proper election in several years, and to me that speaks of some very unhealthy disinterest on the part of the electorate. Prove me wrong by changing that.

            I have publicly disagreed with both administration and our superintendent on several issues over the years, and I’ve been open and honest about it, both in person and in print. As example, I have been very vocal about a stance board president Shannon Nordstrom has taken regarding public comments, and the public comments policies the school has in place. I’ve quoted him several times saying that the school board meeting is a “meeting in public and not a public meeting” and I cannot even begin to describe how un-American, backward and wrong-headedly repugnant I find that statement to be. And he knows that’s exactly how I feel about it, because I’ve said it to him directly and in print. However, he is someone whom I like personally and somebody who has a track record of creating real and permanent good for the community as a whole. I can say the exact same thing about Guy Johnson. I have not agreed with or liked some of his decisions over the years, but I know that he is personally 100% committed to making sure our students have the best education that is possible for them to get. And honestly, cutting the salary of a single administrator is not going to fix the school’s financial problems.

            Continuing to talk turkey here, there are some I’ve heard who want to make the school pay for ousting Chris Long last year. I didn’t like the way that whole situation was handled or went down, and I did my job and reported on it. Some have said they won’t be satisfied until Supt. Johnson has resigned and Shannon Nordstrom along with him. There are some people still mad about the last opt-out election cycle and how badly it was mismanaged. There are some who want to wipe the slate clean, and get rid of all the standing administrators and school board members. I understand that frustration. I had stories in my paper about all those things, and it’s my job to let you know when things go sideways. I’m also happy to publish the many triumphs and successes we’ve had as a community. A lot of those have come directly from the school house.

            Here is why I’m voting for the Opt-Out. I have a 9-year-old in fourth grade and I haven’t met a single Garretson teacher or employee who I think deserves the axe. I blame the legislature for the problem, honestly. Their school funding scheme is just that, a scheme. It’s as broken as pickup truck with a bent axle and they’ve no interest or political will in fixing it. Even with this year where they raised teacher salaries by 7 percent, they’re still not doing the job of honest school funding reforms that need to be done. They have plenty of cash to work with, but instead, they’re passing the buck onto local districts and local taxpayers. Like Pontius Pilate, they’ve washed their hands of the matter.

            So, if this means I have to dig a little deeper as a home owner or business owner to keep the school solvent, I’ll do it. Make no mistake, other districts in the area will eat Garretson for breakfast if we can’t compete. I want the school to stay strong and solvent. As far as the rest goes, if you don’t like the leadership at the school, you can challenge it every election cycle, or at every school board meeting. That’s your right, so put your money where your mouth is.

-Garrick

[/s2If]

Letter to the Editor: On the Opt-Out

            I was recently informed by some of my in-town friends that on some website available to others, but not me, I was called out by the administration for using misinformation and purposely trying to mislead the public on school issues.

            I assure you that nothing could be further from the truth. First, I have always said that Garretson has inherited some difficulties just because we are the size district that we are. People who were searching for the truth heard me say that at the opt out meeting. Because of our enrollment we should have one and a half teachers per grade. Well, we know that is not possible.

            I think most who really care about education favor 15 to 17 students in a classroom instead of 30 to 35. So where do we cut? We saw a list of 5 or 6 items presented by the administration, most of which were the same ones we saw on previous opt out attempts.

            After the public voted to support the opt out in 2016, I went to a school board meeting to offer one idea on where we could save, it fell on deaf ears. Also, before that opt out, I went to the top administration to offer a list of ten items that others, including staff had shared with me. The list was not looked at, the response was “We’ll see if the opt out passes first.”

            At one time in that discussion, we were led to believe that if we supported that opt out it should be the last one needed.

            Many believe that to operate within the budget restraints of a school our size we need to look at all possible savings, but not cut within the classroom.

            What was called into question was numbers that I used when comparing with two neighboring schools that I admire, Alcester and Baltic. In both those schools the Superintendent had multiple duties. My numbers were right on with Baltic, which I said had two more in high school than Garretson.

            In the case of Alcester my numbers were not close, they are smaller than what I indicated, that is on me. But my point is still the same, those districts found ways to live within their budget.          In Baltic the Superintendent was also a principal. In Alcester the Superintendent also drives bus, is grade school principal, and Special Ed Director. Will or have things changed some in those districts as their monetary situations change, I would expect so.

            But both of these schools are examples of what we could do instead of threatening to fire classroom teachers as seems to be the case in Garretson.

            I will also point out that I was called out as responsible for the vote no signs, not true. But whoever did have them made, I couldn’t agree more with the first line, “until there is change.”

            To those voices who share the fear that our school will close if this does not pass, I tell you we have seen the same song and dance for far too long.

            According to state law “it is the duty of the district, that is us, to provide a free and fair public education for all the students of our district.”  Then let’s do so responsibly so we can provide that education for all the kids that I hold dear long into the future.

            To the sign makers, if you are wondering where some of your signs went, I was told the administration called the mayor to have signs removed if they were on city property, and so city workers removed them. And that is the law, signs have to be on privately owned property.

            Too bad the administration didn’t also know election law before the last opt out election at which there were no poll watchers and so results had to be thrown out.

            I have also seen vote yes signs, no problem, each has to vote for what they think is right.  Enough said.

-Oran Sorenson

[/s2If]

Letter to the Editor: Invest in Yes for Garretson

Invest in YES for Garretson. Vote YES on the Opt-Out Vote. Invest in our current and future Blue Dragons!

            The residents of the Garretson School District have been presented a very important choice to consider with upcoming vote on Tuesday, March 21st. The question is whether our district should join close to 50 percent of the districts in the State and opt out of the state’s formula for funding schools. This vote is important to say YES to if we want to maintain the programming we currently have in place at the school, including our positive student to teacher ratios, which has always been important to our families and staff in the district.

            I have been involved in the “behind the scenes” of the Garretson School District since joining the board 10 years ago. I am currently serving as the school board president. I have and have had the pleasure of working with many extremely knowledgeable and caring board members with a wide variety of areas of expertise that they bring to the table.

            This diversification of our board has been good and there has always been someone that can offer “extra knowledge” in specific areas. I and these other board members have studied many different subject matters and situations with the guidance of our administration.

            I have learned that for the district to match our mission and perform the necessary work to match the needs of a very diverse student base requires special work and special people in our buildings daily.

            The needs of our students continue to INCREASE not DECREASE. The attention required for students with learning disabilities, students recovering the learning deficits from covid, and with more students than ever with behavioral issues related to serious mental health concerns continues to increase.

            These challenges come along with the happy normal school environment of teaching and championing for the wide variety of personalities that are gathered with our GHS students and families. It does take all hands-on deck to do things well. The Middle School-High School principal needs to be focused on the staff and students grades 6-12 on all facets of education, discipline, and future thinking. The Elementary principal does the same for those precious k-5 kiddo’s, parents, and staff.

            The expectations of what a school needs to do for students has continued to grow in those areas as well. The Special Ed director must focus on a growing set of challenges as this group has grown faster than most can imagine. This need is seen across the State and region, it has been in the news and is well documented in the meetings we attend in the world of “school”.

            We need to keep an eye on curriculum and communicate with others in the area districts to keep up to date in these areas also. Our Superintendent is busy planning, implementing, and monitoring all facets of our student’s education and with the business of the school and its staff.

            I have had a front row seat and the subjects to tend to, monitor and plan for do not seem to have limits. I have witnessed our superintendent as a life-long learner that will tirelessly lead and watch over for the district and the students, making important decisions in the best interest of the district, even when unpopular with some.  The business manager is constantly working on the daily records, finances and HR needs of the staff. It is truly an enterprise more than I imagined when I first raised my hand to join the board.   I also have a business background building and managing our family company which has now reached 80 Employees.

            I have learned that not everything that I do for a private business translates to the public sector. This can be very frustrating at times, but I have taken the time to learn why some things are the way they are, and it mostly makes sense. There are times all I can do is shake my head as your hands are tied by State and Federal rules and regulations.

            When our school district opted out the first time in 2016, I said my goal was to use the extra public money only as needed as the student numbers increased; they did, and we honored that pledge. For the final two years of the previous opt out we did not take the full $500,000, we only used $350,000. It was important to the administration and the board to honor that pledge; that importance has not changed.

            Nobody wants to spend more money, that is completely understandable, and I am with you. When I am involved in asking the public for money, I take it very seriously. I hear what people tell me and listen; I am not immune to it. I wear it in my gut with my caring and hyper DNA. I know that many others in the district care the same and many have opinions that are different.  I respect your opinion, albeit we may not all agree on every subject and decision.

            What I do not want is LESS in our school. I have seen what it takes to make it all happen. The staff’s job has not gotten any “easier” with the students. The coordination with the government agencies and the requirements to keep current and in compliance has not lessened. All the bureaucracy and legalities has increased, and you must do everything to the letter of the law, or we will find our district in serious legal jeopardy. 

            An opt out will cost our family just like it will cost yours, but I look at YES as an important investment in our future. I look at YES as investment in our community. I look at YES as in investment in the lives of EVERY student. I look at YES as investment in the teachers and staff it takes to offer a FULL school experience for all students.  I look at YES as an investment in my property. Do we really want to make our school LESS than it can be and show how we can “get by”.

            I prefer not to do less when it comes to the education of EVERY child and young adult and helping them with their growth and well-being for their future. We now have data showing the results of recent efforts with the REACH program and student support teams and it is very positive.

            These are the things that get me very excited. I am witnessing the focus on doing things the right way for every child. Our Administration team is leading as a group, all pulling the same direction to lead the different groups and reporting back with progress and having accountability for the work to get done. We have great teachers and staff that are working hard but at the same time are being asked to do some things differently than they have in the past. The goal is to make sure we can continue to move the needle in a positive way with our student performance and inclusion. Why would we want to cut these efforts short when the results are showing the difference (info to be released at the next board meeting).

            I feel there has been a lot of change at the school and it has been moving in positive direction. That change has also made some people uncomfortable as there is consistent accountability to the expectations of education and behavior.

            We have administration leading and challenging the staff to follow. Within the staff there is a commitment to raising the bar for the good of education and fostering an environment where kids can have fun learning, feel safe and can be prepared for their future whether that be the workforce or furthering their education.

            We are a currently a unique size district that does not hit the target for the State’s formula. We are a district that will grow if we continue to offer the programs and ratios that we historically have. It is important to stay the course with the structure of our school. 

            The larger community has rallied with efforts like “Grow Garretson” and the city has made huge infrastructure investments for the future since the last opt out. We need to stay the course and let those investments mature and bring those young children into the schoolhouse to become Blue Dragons for life. Please think bigger than a difference or perception that some might have with a teacher, or administrator.

            Since I have been old enough to pay attention, clear back to my elementary time in Garretson I remember there has been and I suspect there will always be challenges where not all will agree. Often, from these differences strong opinions will grow but we cannot let that distract us from the bigger picture. Often doing the right thing is not always the popular thing.

            I have witnessed and have been part of a commitment to doing the right thing to work on a bigger vision and want to see the results to the finish line. As our sign says outside of town reads, I am “Proud to Call Garretson Home” and I invite you to invest in YES with me. 

            Sorry, this was long, but I had many thoughts I desired to convey as a parent, community member and with my years as a school board member. Thank you for taking the time to read this.

-Shannon Nordstrom

[/s2If]

s2Member®