When we elect School Board Trustees, aren’t they supposed to oversee the Superintendent and make sure that the values of the community are represented..

Shouldn’t the Superintendent and the Board of Trustees be working together to make sure that the core services provided by the District remain intact and that the classroom education of the community’s students is not compromised, even in times of a recession when everyone is forced to make prudent modifications in their spending habits and eliminate those things they can live without?

When the recent levy failed, shouldn't the Board of Trustees and the Superintendent have been able to see that the their priorities were not in line with the priorities of the community?

Evidently not, or they simply didn't care. Mary Vagner’s first reaction after the shock of having the levy fail, was to lash out at the community and threatened to punish the community and our children by cutting essential services and firing up to forty teachers.

Those of us who have taken conflict resolution classes, recognized Vagner’s behavior as assuming the child ego mode, characterized by tantrums, has to have everything one’s own way, threats, etc.

Is our School District Superintendent incapable of assuming the Adult Ego Mode when trying to work out differences between her priorities and the community’s priorities.

If that is the case, do we, her employers have to put up with threats to cut essential services and the firing of teachers.

I realize that cutting the 2009-2010 School District Budget will take a lot of soul searching and hard work to bring the budget in line with available funding. The first thing that we all ought to be able to agree on is that core services and teachers are the last considerations for cuts, not the first.

So, where do we start? I think the community has to get involved in answering that question, and they have started to do that.

This past week, the District held two meetings to explain where they thought they could cut the budget and still retain core services. The number of suggestions that were proposed by citizens attending the two meetings were encouraging and I believe showed a willingness of the community to get involved in trying to solve the problems we face.

Personally, I was happy to hear all the suggestions from those attending the meetings, but I didn't hear many suggestions dealing with the top heavy administration in the District, which seems to be a sacred cow with the Board and Superintendent.

We have Thirty- three administrators in the District that make $70,000.00 to almost $132,000.00 a year. Several of those administrators make $80,000.00 to $94,000.00 a year and the Superintendent makes close to $132,000.00.

There are an additional sixteen administrators that make $60,000.00 to a little under $70,000.00 a year.

If those administrators making between $70,000.00 and 132,000.00 would take a voluntary pay cut of ten percent while the recession lasts, they would still be making a lot more a year than most in the community, but would save the District $971,000.00 a year. If the sixteen administrators making $60,000.00 to $70,000.00 would also take some kind of percentage pay cut the savings all together could be a million dollars a year or a little more.

I think an even better solution would be to consolidate the duties of all the administrators into fewer administrators, saving the entire salaries of the discontinued administrators and still having the remaining administrators take a percentage pay cut while the recession lasts.

The savings that would come from consolidation of administrative duties and voluntary percentage pay cuts would not solve all the District’s financial problems, but would be a very good start and would show their priorities are in line with the community in preserving the integrity of the core educational services and reducing expenses at the administrative level.

There are other areas where the District could cut expenses in non-essential programs and travel expenses. Many of these ideas have been written about in the many letters that have been sent to the letters to the editor section of the newspaper, including the four day school week, with Monday as the no school day. In addition, the suggestions the Board received at the two budget meetings this past week should give the board enough areas to consider.

I suggest we not even consider passing the levy scheduled for April or any other levy until we are satisfied the District has done everything possible to cut costs where possible and retain the core educational services.

The School Board meeting on Thursday, March 12, 2009, at 7:00PM, was well attended and the Board and Superintendent heard from several speakers, at least one who spoke several times.

The majority of people who spoke were opposed to the up coming levy and suggest several ways the District could cut its budget and live with in it's means.

Hopefully, the Board and Superintendent now realize that obfuscation and threatening the community and our children will not be tolerated.

I would like to encourage any one who is interested in this issue to attend the next meeting on March 19, 2009, at 4:30, at  the District Education Center.

The Board and Superintendent will be itemizing the input received at this weeks two meetings and reviewing the suggestions they received.

We voted no on the last levy. We can keep doing that until the Board and Superintendent bring their priorities in line with those of the community.

Lately I have been trying to take advantage of the hunting season, and have been out enjoying the mountains and looking for a buck to put in the freezer. This year my thoughts keep going back to the up coming election and how much the choice we make is going to effect our future. It seems that many people are thinking in terms of which candidate is the lesser of two evils, while others proclaim their choice as some kind of savior come to deliver us from the mess we are in.

If you have read any of my previous blogs on the subject, you probably know I am voting for McCain because I believe he is the most experienced and qualified for the job of Commander in Chief and President of The United States.

This past week I ran across a Post called, "To Barack Hussein Obama", by a Michael Master of Mclean, Virginia. It’s taken me a couple of days to verify the facts in the post, and has interfered with my hunting time.

The writer has done a good job of sticking to verifiable facts and I would recommend that anyone who hasn’t read this, and is concerned about making the best choice for our future view the post at, http://atlanta.craigslist.o...

Evidently the entire web site did not come through on my post, but if you click on it it will take you to the post by Michael Master.

RE-DISTRIBUTE THE WEALTH?

Some people have been getting pretty excited about Barack Obama’s plan to not tax anyone with a yearly income of under $250,000.00. The reason Obama has been espousing this idea, is because he knows that those making less than $250,000.00 comprise the majority of American registered voters and he is hoping that he can get most of them to vote for him. He also knows that it won’t work. At least if he has any sense of history he knows it won’t work. He is hoping that we won’t figure that out until after he is elected, since we will be so excited to think that we won’t have to pay federal income tax any more.

Richard Larsen in his column, where he compared Obama’s plan to Herbert Hoover’s policies did a great job of explaining the problem that most of us recognize as a re-distribute the wealth plan. During my life time there have been several attempts by interestingly enough, Democrats, to re-distribute the wealth either by the promise of no taxes for the poor and middle class, or reduced taxes of the poor and middle class with the major burden of taxes falling on the wealthy.

Most of the time re-distribution of the wealth proposals were defeated because the so called Greatest Generation, that had to live through the Great Depression recognized re-distribute the wealth programs as one of the factors that contributed to the Great Depression and they rejected those programs at the polls. Now, the Greatest Generation has passed away or soon will, since they are now in their late eighties or nineties. Obama and the Democratic Party are hoping that since the majority of registered voters never experienced the Great Depression, but are struggling to make ends meet, re-distribution of the wealth will propel them into the white house. If it does, we will either see Obama concede that he can’t fulfill the promise of no taxes for the poor and middle classes, or if he and a Democrat majority actually pass the legislation, we will be in for the toughest of times.

The re-distribution of the wealth plan relies on the false assumption that the wealthy will pay all or the majority of the Nation’s federal income tax since the percentage of the wealthy’s income that is taxed will increase. The wealthy will be just fine because they make so much that what is left will easily keep them living in the style they have always lived. The poor and middle classes however, will experience more money than they have ever had before because now, they get to keep what they used to pay in taxes.

What I learned in high school and College government classes plus a couple of political science classes I took as electives, and what my father and the rest of the Greatest Generation learned the hard way, is frightening.

Since the wealthy are now burdened with the lions share of the federal income tax, industry will slow down since industry is primarily owned by our wealthiest citizens. As a result of the slow down and down sizing, workers will be laid off to cut expenses. Since industry isn’t producing as much, investing as much or making as much money as before, taxes from the wealthy will not meet the government’s predicted levels. The government will not be generating enough to pay expenses and the National Debt will soar upward. In an effort to meet expenses the government will be forced to re-introduce income taxes for the poor and middle classes. Now the only problem is that the original re-distribute the wealth program has left the poor and middle classes out of work and they can’t pay taxes. However they can now start voting Obama and the rest of the scoundrels that put them into this mess, out of office.

That is exactly what happened to Herbert Hoover after he and his congress passed the legislation.

Whether you are impressed with John McCain or not, (I’m mildly impressed) he has gone on record as saying he will not repeat the mistakes of the Hoover Administration that contributed to the Great Depression, he is supported by a majority of retired military generals and service men and women and has a proven record of promoting bi-partisanship. His worst problem seems to be the same as Barry Goldwater’s was years ago. He has a no nonsense approach to solving problems and talks very bluntly at times. That scares some people.

We can’t spin the bottle again and see if we can do better than Obama or McCain for the next four years so we have to choose one or the other.

I would never try to insinuate that if people are smart, they will vote the way I vote. Could I at least suggest that we all think hard and make what we feel is the best decision for the country. We are all going to be on this ride together for the next four years.

WHAT KIND OF CHANGE DO YOU WANT?

Although I have nothing personal against Barrack Obama as a person, I’m getting a little tired of his supporters trying to allege that every criticism of his philosophy or policies is racially motivated.

Richard Larsen did a great job in his column of explaining that Obama’s thinking isn’t new, but follows the same thinking and policies of President Herbert Hoover. Those policies were disastrous for the country and deepened the depression. If you haven’t already done so, read Larson’s column.

The more I study Barack Obama the more I am convinced that he is naive and unprepared to lead this country. Remember when he boldly stated that as President, he would immediately bring the troops home from Irag? One of his advisers evidently was able to educate him in an aspect of international law that he had missed and the next thing we knew he was telling us that on further reflection, he would support a time table withdrawal of troops instead of an out right withdrawal. Feeling that he had masterfully avoided ridicule on his withdrawal of troops from Iraq, he then proceeded to tell us what he would do in Afghanistan. John McCain rightfully told Obama and the nation that as President he wouldn’t telegraph his punches and tell the enemy what he was going to do. To do so is lunacy.

It is exactly this kind of naivety on Barack Obama’s part that worries me. I have a son who is a military policeman in the National Guard and could be called to serve in Iraq or Afghanistan. I don’t want the President of the United States doing anything to compromise his safety and place him in more danger than he and his unit are already being exposed to.

Although I think Obama is an intelligent individual, he seems to be unwilling to learn important lessons that are in conflict with his personal agenda. When criticized for his statements concerning the war in Iraq since he had never been there, he immediately made arrangements to go to Iraq. However, all he could talk about when he returned was that the people of Iraq want America to leave. The truth, if you talk to military people who have served there is, that the majority of Iraqi people are trying to rebuild their country and are grateful for the presence of U.S. soldiers who are assisting them in keeping the peace while they rebuild their country’s Government, schools, and economy. Once the people of Iraq are able to stabilize their country, both they and the United States want to see an orderly withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq.

However, the President of the United States isn’t just the Commander in Chief. He has to make some hard decisions here at home also. After President Bush had been in office seven and a half years, consumer confidence was at a two and a half year high, Regular gas was $2.19 a gallon, unemployment was 4.5%, the Dow Jones hit a record high of 1400+, and Americans were buying cars, taking cruises, traveling overseas.

WHAT HAPPENED?

In 2006 we voted in a democratic congress. For two years this democratic congress has done absolutely nothing except to oppose the policies that were starting to improve the lives of every American.

Now, consumer confidence has plummeted, Regular gas went over $4.00 a gallon and is currently $3.32 where I buy gas, unemployment has risen 10%, to 5.5%, home equity has dropped 12 trillion dollars, and 1 % of American homes are in foreclosure.

In 2006 Americans wanted change and voted in a democratic congress that is ruining our economy by doing nothing. Now, Barack Obama claims he will give us change as President with this same democratic congress. Ask yourself, how much more of this change do you think we can stand?

NO HUNTING, NO TRESPASSING

I have spent as much time as possible this past Summer and Fall in the mountains where I plan to hunt. Basically, I’ve been getting the camp area ready for hunting season this year and scouting the area out to see if the deer and elk are still using the same trails and are frequenting the same areas. Mostly I like being in the mountains and will use any excuse to go spend as much time there as possible.

This year I have noticed more farmers and ranchers posting their property and telling hunters that the area is off limits and that trespassers will be prosecuted. Happily I won’t be affected for two reasons. First, the area I hunt is quite a ways above, more remote and not as accessible as the farm and ranch areas. I also own the land the camp site is on as well as a lot of the land around it. The second reason is the one that interests me most. Several of the land owners have told me that the signs are not  meant for me, but have been posted because of some of the hunters that they have had to deal with for the past two or three years. I guess they finally had enough of these guys.

It is unfortunate that some people can’t have enough respect for others property that even farmers and ranchers that for years gladly allowed hunters to hunt their land are now posting that land.

I’m not sure I know all the problems they have encountered, but let me suggest some I have seen myself.

1) Hunting from four wheelers, trucks and 4X4 vehicles and driving the same across farm land instead of sticking to trails and roads.

2) Not asking permission of the land owner and hearing his/her particular concerns before entering the land.

3) Littering

4) Not closing gates or leaving gates the way they found them.

5) Camping in areas where the land owner doesn’t want people to camp or build fires.

6) Drinking and partying in camp which upsets wildlife and causes accidents.

7) hunting while hung over from the night before.

8) Bringing pets(does not include horses) that upset wildlife and any farm animals that might be in the area.

9) Shooting in directions that could endanger farm animals or buildings.

10) Being rude to others, particularly the land owner or his/her employees.

I have even been told by a couple of people that they were on BLM land when they were in fact on private property. It would seem that if people want to hunt, they would make sure they know where they are. However, not everyone does know where they are.

Hopefully, this year will be a good year for hunting, particularly in terms of winning back permission to hunt some of the land that has been posted. Not everyone that wants to hunt owns the land they are hunting.

DEER CAMP II

Last Fall I wrote about getting ready for deer camp during the hunting season. At that time my eldest grandson informed me that he was going to hunt with us. Well, he is back again this year. He is quite a bit taller and a little bit quieter this year. He still prefers to load his day pack with candy, Oreo mint cookies, Ritz crackers, cheese wiz, and soda pop instead of a small survival kit, extra cartridges, parachute cord, field glasses, field dressing kit, extra fleece pullover, water bottle etc.

I think his dad is going to have him use a .243 instead of my old 30-30 this year. Last year the 30-30 wasn’t ideal for the ranges that we usually saw deer. The .243 shoots flatter and reaches out a little better without any perceivable increase in recoil as far as I can determine.

He has a cell phone this year, but I think he is going to be devastated when he learns that it doesn’t work where we are going, and we will not drive him within range of the nearest tower whenever he wants to call or text his friends.

My son and I have been scouting the area we want to hunt in all summer, and have identified several places that look real good if the deer will come to the same places during the season. This year all the men in the family who are old enough to hunt, plus a couple friends are planing on spending some time with us in deer camp. We think we have enough places for everyone to set up with a reasonable chance of seeing deer, and the camp site is a nice place to relax when people want to take a break.

We always invite our wives to go with us, but they don’t want to go. My wife won’t go anywhere unless there is water running out of a faucet and there is an indoor, flushing toilet.  Yellow Stone Park is as primitive as she is willing to get. I actually met her on a BYU thirty day survival course, called, Youth Leadership 480, while I was in graduate school.

Nationally respected nutritionist, Jim Rhoades will be at the Ameritel Inn tonight at 7:00 pm to discuss the Isagenix Health and Nutrition program. This is not a diet plan, but a health and nutrition program, although some people have experienced safe weight loss on the program.

Admission is free,so whether you are interested in the best nutrition available or looking for a good home based business, you are welcome as our guests.

These meetings usually last an hour to an hour and a half depending on questions from those attending.

        & nbsp;       &n bsp;       &nb sp;       &nbs p;         ;        UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR

A couple of days ago I received an article on my e-mail called, "You ain’t going to like losing". The author was discussing what kind of person we need in the White House as we move into the future. Most of the sentiment in the article was well thought out and I found my self in agreement with most points that the author made.

The person who forwarded the article to me knew that my political views were very similar to the author’s and thought I would enjoy the article. I did enjoy the article until I read the last paragraph. In the last paragraph the author quoted Barack Obama, as saying in his book, "The Audacity of Hope", "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction". In reality, that isn’t what Mr. Obama wrote. If you have a copy of, "The Audacity of Hope", turn to page 261. Mr. Obama was talking about the treatment of Japanese Americans during WW II, and his concern that we as Americans would not let the same kind of inflamed sentiment lead us to violate the Constitutional rights of Arab American citizens or any other minority. The word, "Muslim", was not used in the original quote, but was placed there by the Author of, "You ain’t going to like losing", to direct inflamed sentiment toward Barack Obama.

This is the second time I have seemingly come to the defense of Barack Obama, even though I can’t support him for his bid for the Oval Office. However, even though I don’t support Obama, I don’t believe in distorting his or anyone’s comments.

In the end, the Author of, "You ain’t going to like losing", has discredited himself, given Obama more ammunition to use in his bid for office and done John McCain no good at all.

If anyone would like to read, "You ain’t going to like losing", in order to compare it to what was actually said on page 261 of Obama's book, send me your email and I will forward it to you.