Please see above. I spelled it out pretty clearly I thought<quoted text>
I'm possibly willing to see their conflicts of interest if you are willing to tell me, with facts, not innuendo, what they are...other than just say there are conflicts.
And really - I have to ask God to have pity on my soul because I asked a question about wanting someone to detail a conflict of interest? Don't ya think that is a little much?
There are 31911 comments on the Dayton Daily News story from Feb 5, 2008, titled Our recommendation: Springboro voters should say 'yes' the first time to school levies. In it, Dayton Daily News reports that:
Recommended local sites More... UD sports info, pictures and discussions Are you a UD sports fan? Whether you like basketball, volleyball, soccer, men's or women's teams -- Doesn't matter -- this site is for ... via Dayton Daily News
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Dayton Daily News.
#27666 Oct 2, 2013
#27667 Oct 2, 2013
The folks responsible for the placement of VOTE YES ISSUE 3 signage earlier this year must have missed your memo about not placing political signs in public right-of-ways.
#27668 Oct 2, 2013
Not real clear as you were rambling, but yes, interesting argument. But "where your best interests lie" is not a conflict of interest. Its a difference in philosophies. "Conflict of interest" is a legal argument and you have put forth a "political argument". Much different.
#27669 Oct 2, 2013
Legal/political...symmantics. The truth is there are conflicts of interest if he is elected by the community. How do you represent the community and the kids to the best of your ability if you also have to worry about your wife and kids pay and benefits?
#27670 Oct 2, 2013
Not semantics at all. And how do you represent the community and the kids to the best of your ability if you also have kids in the system and you need to adopt a standard that you know would be detrimental to your children but is good for all others? We can have these political "conflict of interest" arguments all day....
#27671 Oct 2, 2013
I'm not a believer that you have to have kids in the system to do a good job. I am simply using the "logic" that was used during the last election cycle by those that now support SAM.
Although I would ask, why would a parent or any BOE member adopt a standard that is detrimental to their own children?
Unless of course the detriment served a broader self interest...say, to the union and your own family's personal pocketbook benefit. I'd say your argument is a fallacy of logic.
I don't see that conflict with any of the current BOE members nor the Bitner/Vaughn ticket. Suppose to put Children First...right?
Do you honestly believe the SAM ticket wants to "take their board back" to continue the success we have seen with the Children First budgeting?
#27672 Oct 2, 2013
I would hope not because if you support Mr. Petroni, which it sounds like you probably do, then you should not be a believer that all BOE members need to have kids in the schools. However, I would differentiate that just a tad.....Mr. Petroni chooses to keep his kids out of the school district....the same district he is an elected leader of. I believe SAM (as you call them) all had kids attend the school district, when they were eligible? Semantics I guess.....
Yes, why would a BOE member adopt a standard that is detrimental to their own children? They wouldn't. Isn't that a conflict of interest then if the standard was good for everyone else? My example was just one to show that conflicts or perceived conflicts can be anywhere or happen to anyone. What you have to hope is that if there is a true conflict that the BOE member would recuse themselves from any vote that would help them or specifically their family. So just because some candidates may have family members working for the School District, does not mean there is automatically a conflict as you suggest.
Please argue candidates based on facts, not suppositions and assumptions.
#27673 Oct 2, 2013
Unfortunately for Mr. Malone and Mr. Stuckey, they do not have any in the school district today, and today and tomorrow is when they would be governing. Today and tomorrow are quite different than the cozy days of yesteryear.
Mr. Malone and Mr. Stuckey will not be experiencing first hand the education we are offering our children as viewed from our children's perspective. It is one thing to wander the halls absorbing all the love and adulation being directed your way for making the high school fun and easy, it is another to experience the educational opportunities you personally had developed.
As anyone with a teenager is likely to tell you, your own child may not talk to you as much as you like, but their friends certainly will. Taking the time to listen to kids at the high school discuss certain teachers who instruct via workbook worksheets then either read the paper, or play on the phone, or dally on their computer for the rest of the period can be a real eye opener. Our children are not as gullible as some may wish and tend to know which teachers can teach and which are just occupying time and space.
Lacking that sounding board of the children who live the decisions the board makes would certainly reduce the board's effectiveness.
The current board has Kelly Kohls with children in the district's classrooms. Wendy Kull has children in three different schools throughout the district. Don Miller has children in the district.
Certain members of the community who castigated Mr. Petroni and Mr. Rigano now voice full support for a board that would contain no actual parents with children in our classrooms.
My but how the situational ethical concerns shift with winds.
Kolton Vaughn and David Bitner both know something about being a parent of a child in the schools of our district and bring a voice for the parents to the table.
The choice is becoming one of a voice for the parents vs only voices for adults, whose loyalties may lie hidden elsewhere with a different agenda.
#27674 Oct 2, 2013
You are supposing and assuming...I am not. You are supposing and assuming that a BOE member with children in the system would do something that would be detremental to their education. I'm not sure how that assumption makes your argument.
It is a fact that Malone was a dues paying member of the SEA
It is a fact that Stuckey was a dues paying member of the SEA
It is fact that Malone has a wife and child that are employed by us.
It is a fact that the wife and child are dues paying members of the SEA.
It is a fact that this slate of candidates are supported largely financially by the SEA and its members.
It is a fact that this slate of candidates have been preassembled as a package by the SEA to "regain control of "THEIR" BOE.
It is a fact that these candidates and the SEA forced Lisa Babb to withdraw her name as not to siphon off votes in their efforts to "retake their Board"
It is a fact that, if elected, this slate of candidates will not further the progress of the current Children First system that has proven itself to be very successful for our kids and community.
And is a shining example for the rest of the state of Ohio
It is a fact that in the last election cycle the same SAM supporters cried from the highest mountains that not having children in the system was reason enough not to vote for Petroni and Rigano. Yet this election they are whistling quite the different tune.
It is a fact that these same SAM supporters bellowed about frivilous lawsuits that were (falsely) all due to Dr Kohls actions.
It is a fact that David Stuckey has previously sued, and lost, the district because he didn't get the coaching job he wanted. Frivilous?
Where are my assumptions and suppositions of conflicts of interests and double standards?
Instead of ignoring and rationalizing the obvious, try to assure me that a vote for your preferred candidates will not go back to the children second union first platform that we saw year after year with one unneeded levy request after another.
Until then...I'm doing what SAM supporters told me to do last election. I'm supporting those that have the vested interest in their kids and our kids...
...Bitner and Vaughn this November.
#27675 Oct 2, 2013
...or we could just tell the truth that enough is enough of
status quo and just say NO to union school board candidates
Just Remember in November that ONLY union school board members would ever consider "adopting a standard that is known to be detrimental to children..." and Mr. Malone has already told voters that he is running for election to gain control of the board's successful children's first budget and re-instate union first business as usual. Now what could be more detrimental to our school children and community than a union controlled school board?
#27676 Oct 2, 2013
Hey "care to". Please buck-up and respond to Heart Burn's question.
Re: school board candidates having a "conflict of interest" because they HAVE children enrolled in the district.
During the summer of 2010, David Petroni endured loads of criticism of home schooling, only to emerge victorious and become probably the most popular board member.
This community remembers...
Bitner's and Vaughn's opposition have absolutely nada-zip-zero chance of successfully playing this card.
#27677 Oct 2, 2013
Just remember in November that the important thing is NOT just to get out there and VOTE, just because the time has come! Even more important than voting IS knowing how to Vote Responsibly!
A VOTE is a terrible thing to waste!
Now is the TIME to get out there and spread the word that Springboro school board candidates,
David Bitner and Kolton Vaughn, are Parents Representing Parents AND on board with the
current board's Win-Win agenda of Students First/Responsible Budgeting!
Vote November 5, 2013, for David Bitner and Kolton Vaughn, whose worthy reform-minded philosophy is a good fit with our school district's board approved 21st century education.
#27678 Oct 2, 2013
So what do Bitner and Vaughn stand for? I think they are just pawns of Kelly Kohl. She was afraid losing a school board election would dim her chances for moving on to bigger and better things.
#27679 Oct 2, 2013
You wouldn't be asking this question if you'd attended Bitner & Vaughn's meet and greet.
Or, maybe you did!
Were you that coward who lurked in a SUV on East St and snapped pictures of people as they were came and went?
#27680 Oct 2, 2013
Thank you very much for inquiring!
#27681 Oct 2, 2013
I know this to be true, take it for it's worth...Kelly Kohls is not part of the Kolton Vaughn campaign.
So playing "Kohls Pawn" card is moot.
#27682 Oct 2, 2013
So what do Malone, Stuckey and Anderson stand for? I think they are just pawns of the SEA.
#27683 Oct 2, 2013
...there you go again lurking around the dark corners of politics of personal destruction!
I strongly disagree with your bitter, pessimistic attitude toward our Students First/Responsible Budgeting non-union school board candidates; and why are you still spewing out on this blog your jealousy of our highly respected and well-accomplished school board president?
Kelly Kohls is a professional who will always find an avenue to serve others, no matter the road she chooses to travel in her professional and personal endeavors! That's just the kind of good neighbor and civic minded public servant that she is!
Our school district is fortunate in having Kelly's leadership and her long lasting influence will continue growing into our students 21st century education.
The way I see it, Your pre-judging of these two Springboro parents/school board candidates (who have the WILL and the SKILL to serve our school children and community as fiscal responsible board representatives) reminds me of the Springboro parent and BOE member who pre-judged a Guest Speaker at a recent public school board meeting, falsely accusing that he had come to deliver "hate speech" before he was even introduced at the meeting!(Wasn't that just because the guest was invited by our school board president? And aren't you trying to link these two school board candidates with NEGATIVITY, just because that's the narrow minded status quo kind of person you are?)
#27684 Oct 2, 2013
Correction: Malone and Stuckey are poster-child pawns of the SEA.
Anderson is Malone and Stuckeys wing-man, with a legit personality.
#27685 Oct 2, 2013
Kelly Kohls was the petition circulator for both Bitner and Vaughn. Go to the board of elections and pull their petitions. So I think she is very involved BUT good try!
Add your comments below
|The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10)||1 hr||Zeke the Pinhead||20,201|
|bad Middletown neighborhoods (Jul '13)||3 hr||MethyOheadofDayton||9|
|This is your oasis (Jun '08)||12 hr||just me||3,175|
|We await the "7-11" apologies to Trump...||13 hr||Dump the Leon||5|
|David Paul Buhrman (Jun '11)||21 hr||David_M_B||2|
|Mart Crowe (May '12)||Mon||Deceived||71|
|why do white people smell like wet dogs? (Oct '14)||Mon||Dennis Gannon||39|
Find what you want!
Search Springboro Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC