After eighteen years, Coach “Bear” Herb Huskey retired from his position as the Fruita Monument Cross Country team head coach.  Assistant coach Terri Bowen who worked with Huskey for eight years also decided to move on to other pursuits.  My youngest son, like his two older brothers, is on the team.  Between him and his brothers, I’ve been involved with the cross country team for ten years. Here’s what I’ve seen and what I think is most interesting about Huskey and Bowen’s program: it’s huge!

For anybody who ever ran a mile in PE class and thought that there couldn’t possibly be anything more tortuous, cross country is like an extended nightmare.  Physically, I don’t think there is a more difficult sport to do.  The coaches pick some spot on the horizon, point to it, and tell the kids, “Run to that, turn around and come back.”  At least that’s what it feels like.  In a typical workout, the kids run for over an hour, sometimes even longer.  Over an hour!  Running!  The football team looks positively lazy in comparison (of course, a cross country runner isn’t periodically slamming into another runner or being tackled).

And yet, as hard as the sport is, dozens of young men and women come out for it, year after year.  Only seven kids can run varsity.  Only a couple of others have a chance to slip into the varsity spots—the competition is intense—but all these other kids show up every day.  How did a program like this develop at FMHS?  What’s going on here?

The only answer that makes sense is Huskey and Bowen created and fostered a culture that kids wanted to be a part of.  They made kids feel included and valuable.  People are hungry for an environment where they believe they matter, and that’s what they got at FMHS on the cross country team.

This week the team held their end of the season banquet.  Many folks cried about Huskey and Bowen’s departure: kids, parents and coaches.  What I got from the banquet is what I believe is what is best in American education and what is our true resource in the classroom: caring, amazingly competent instructors who care deeply about what they are doing for kids.

When we foster an environment where teachers can flourish, we build strong schools.  When highly skilled teachers engage their students in programs where the kids feel included and valuable, the students soar. 

What I think happened in cross country is that instead of the drudgery of the miles, Huskey and Bowen helped their athletes see that the long run can be done in joy.  We should all celebrate our teachers who can give a sense of joy to the students in what they do.

Thank you Bear.  Thank you Terri.  You’ve done more good than we can possibly measure.

~Jim Van Pelt

Teachers want reforms that will truly bring about change

As a parent, I don’t want to see District 51 turned into an experimental playground for extremists. My son may be a couple of years away from entering public schools, but once he gets there, I hope that his school will not have been previously stripped of its morale, resources and autonomy — the unfortunate and sad fate of so many Douglas County schools.

As a teacher in District 51 for the last 17 years and the elected chair of the Western Slope speech and debate community, I don’t want my voice to be ignored.

Consider the many recent rants against public education claiming that teachers’ unions block reforms. Well, if you’ve spent any time in a school over the last decade, you would probably be surprised how dynamic schools actually are and how often change occurs. Teachers want sensible reforms, and those in the classroom know best which reforms can be realistically implemented while still allowing room for individual innovation.

If anything, too many forced changes are constantly happening in our schools. Every year, some new idea is tried but never given the chance to fully succeed. It’s almost comical watching some “reform” come and go — whether it be a federal, state or local mandate.

If there is anything our schools need, it is stability—consistency—simplicity. Hire and retain the best instructors, get out of their way and let them work their magic. Let’s not forget that great teaching has been going on for thousands of years.

To throw away, water down or disregard what already works and call it a reform is the greatest mistake we can make. To believe that what goes into a child’s mind can be simply quantified by a number is shortsighted and ignores many relevant and diverse aspects of a child’s learning.

Only thoughtful policymakers who hear the call of the people in the trenches will be able to face the challenges ahead. Among the many reasons MVEA supports Greg Mikolai, Tom Parrish and John Williams for the District 51 school board is that they listen to the collective and individual voices of teachers, parents and other stakeholders. They have a track record of reasoned decision-making where people work together to solve problems.

Educators don’t want to block reforms; they want reforms they can believe in — reforms that will stick and truly effect change. True leadership is about inspiring — winning over the hearts and minds of those who follow.

There may be some who believe in building resentment and fear, and while this may force a perception of compliance in the short term, those in a free nation will eventually discover the truth.

ANTHONY C. BICHLER
Fruita

Mikolai ably guided district 
through tough financial times

We wish to acknowledge and support the recent endorsements of school- board candidates John Williams and Tom Parrish by The Daily Sentinel and the Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce. We agree with their assessments of the talents and expertise that these two candidates will bring to the school board, if they are elected.

We wish, however, to urge voters to consider carefully the proven leadership that Greg Mikolai has to offer at this critical time for our public schools. Of the two candidates running for District E, only Mikolai has had to balance serious financial constraints with government mandates, while serving the needs of a very diverse student population and seeking to improve student performance and outcomes.

As described in detail by outgoing school board member Leslie Kiesler in a guest column last Sunday in The Daily Sentinel, District 51 continues to be a leader statewide in the struggle to meet these often competing objectives.

It has only been through collaborative efforts among teachers, administrators and the community, and with the effective and visionary leadership of Greg Mikolai, that these goals have been and will continue to be met.

Over the last few years, when District 51 had to cut $30 million from the budget, it put people’s livelihoods and children’s education at stake. Due in large part to Mikolai’s excellent leadership as school board president and the cooperation of other board members, the board was able to keep the cuts as far away from students as possible.

Although much progress has been made, the financial and educational challenges faced by District 51 have not ended. This is a time to build on recent successes and support the growth and maturation of creative efforts recently implemented and embraced by teachers, parents, administrators and students. It is not a time to change leadership.

Mikolai has demonstrated he is a strong leader who analyzes every issue thoroughly and makes informed decisions. On behalf of the members of Strong Schools, Strong Communities, we urge you to re-elect him.

TERESA COONS

Grand Junction

KEN HENRY

Fruita

Candidates’ contributions 
from billionaire troubling

I have spent most of my life here. No issue raises the hackles of Western Slope people more than the Front Range people messing with us: our water, our funding and our politics.

I was very suspicious when I learned a billionaire from Greenwood Village, Ed McVaney, was the biggest contributor to the campaigns of John Sluder, Michael Lowenstein and Pat Kanda for the District 51 school board. Why would someone from the Front Range meddle with a school board election in Mesa County?

I’m not bothered that MVEA was a big contributor to Tom Parrish’s and Greg Mikolai’s campaigns. If teachers want to support them, it makes sense for the teachers’ organization to contribute. Those teachers live and work here. They understand the strengths and weaknesses of our local school district.

What business does a billionaire from the Front Range have in our local election? Unless, of course, he hopes to “do business” here. Unless, of course, he’s hoping to buy our school board and be able to expand the private schools he owns. I say Western Slope issues need to be resolved by Western Slope people!

Can we really trust candidates who can’t raise enough funds locally and have to get funds from someone living on the Front Range? Sluder, Lowenstein and Kanda have walked into a hornet’s nest by accepting McVaney’s money.

RUSSELL CURTIS

Fruita

Mikolai, Williams, Parrish understand district’s complexities

As the husband of a fourth-grade literacy teacher, the father of two District 51 students, and a public school graduate, I think I’m particularly qualified to comment on the current School Board debate. District 51 is the 12th largest district in Colorado, yet it is the second lowest funded on a per-pupil basis. In the past 4 years the District has cut over $30 million from its budget (a 21% decrease); eliminated dozens of teaching, administrative, and support positions; cut programs; reduced services; decreased teacher benefits and contract days; and increased many fees; all while complying with increasing performance mandates and accountability measures. The point is that District 51 truly is doing more with less.

Certainly there are challenges that need addressed, but first we need to get away from the argument that our schools are failing. Anyone who is willing to make that claim hasn’t spent much time in a school lately and is only fueling an unfounded and anecdotally fed public cynicism. Candidates preaching about “getting back to basics” have a generically appealing message, but it’s a message that displays an obviously deficient understanding of our schools, the extraordinarily demanding profession of teaching and the true challenges that face the district.

Why have a variety of parent-led PTOs, the Mesa Valley Education Association, Save Our Students and Strong Schools/Strong Communities endorsed Mikolai, Williams and Parrish? And, why have The Daily Sentinel and the chamber endorsed Williams and Parrish? It’s not to protect the status quo or to advance a liberal agenda, as some have said.

It is because these candidates have all spent time in our schools and understand that the complexities facing the district can only be tackled by a partnership that values public education and its place in our community. Anything less is a disservice.

BENJAMIN DAVID HOFFMAN
Grand Junction

Williams has worked in nonpartisan manner

For eight years I watched John Williams work with the people of Gateway to resolve potential conflicts with the development of the Gateway Canyons Resort.  Before Gateway Canyons hired Williams, there was a great deal of conflict in the community and public hearings for the development were lengthy and contentious.

Williams came on board and immediately began listening to the residents to better understand their concerns and to identify potential problems with future projects.  He literally went door to door, taking time to hear the concerns of each resident and worked with them to find a solution. 

Williams was always respectful in his interactions with the residents. He didn’t take their comments personal and tried to see the situation from their perspective.  While some of the residents weren’t happy with all the outcomes, the majority of the residents were, and that was due to the efforts of Williams.

Listening. Working with residents. Seeking win-win solutions. Showing respect. Those are all characteristics that are important in a school board member, and those are the reasons I am supporting Williams for school board. 

I’ve never known Williams to be partisan. In fact, until just recently, I didn’t even know his party affiliation. It never mattered to me, because he was always focused on personal property rights, was pro-business and worked diligently to balance the two.  Williams and I may not agree on everything, but after eight years in office when I look back, I don’t always agree with myself. 

So, if you are looking for a candidate who is in lockstep with 100 percent of your beliefs ... good luck with that.  But, if you want a candidate who is thoughtful, positive, solutions-oriented and who listens to the people, then Williams is that guy.

JANET ROWLAND
Clifton

Outsiders’ money shouldn’t sway school board election

How heartbreaking to learn that candidates vying for positions at the core of our education system, candidates who are supposed to stand up for and expect nothing less than what is best for our local school children, feel it’s appropriate to allow nonlocal money to infect this critical school board election. Perhaps if a candidate is unable to gain support from local residents, there is a reason and that person should not be in a position that local residents must trust in and depend on.

It is one thing to look to other communities and school districts for examples of innovation, potential or qualities we might emulate, but it is not OK to look to them for money for a local position, allowing someone who doesn’t know us, our neighbors, our teachers or our community to play a role in deciding what is best for our community.

Personally, I don’t feel it’s OK for people who are not members of our community and/or don’t have kids, grandkids or perhaps even friends’ kids in our community’s schools to have the loudest voice of support for people who may take on a significant role in our school district.

This is one more reason I will be voting for Greg Mikolai, John Williams and Tom Parrish. Collectively, coming from 273 individual sources, 80 to 90 percent of donations to Mikolai, Williams and Parrish were locally obtained.

JESSICA MULVEY
Grand Junction

Douglas County’s voucher system simply a tax rebate for wealthy

We in the Save Our Students group were concerned to learn that three of the school board candidates received an unprecedented $15,000 from Ed McVaney, a Front Range billionaire who in his retirement years has taken to building expensive private religious schools.

McVaney’s donations make up 83 percent of their campaign cash. Our concern turned to alarm, however, when we learned that McVaney has supported an entire slate of school board candidates at least once before — in 2011 he successfully funded a takeover of the Douglas County School Board by a slate of political extremists.

Those extremists, once elected, created a controversial voucher program that stripped tax dollars from the public school system and sent them to private schools. Here’s where it’s important to follow the money: The largest single recipient of that taxpayer money was McVaney’s private religious school. It looks as if he bought the board and its members created a system that funneled taxpayer money back to his school.

Vouchers and “choice” sound great in the abstract, but in the future that McVaney is trying to buy they are only available to the wealthy. For example, tuition at McVaney’s school this year is $15,400, plus classroom fees of up to $250 for each class taken.

By contrast, the vouchers from Douglas County amounted to less than $5,000, meaning that only the wealthy could afford to take advantage of the vouchers, because they still had to pay the remaining tuition of $10,000-$12,000 per child.

In the end, the voucher system that was touted as bringing choice to public schools amounted to nothing more than a tax rebate for the wealthy, allowing them to pull their tax money out of the public school system to help send their kids to an expensive private school that ordinary people still couldn’t afford.

But it gets worse. The voucher program took the most advantaged kids from the public schools — the least costly kids to educate – as well as the full per-pupil funding for each of those students. The public schools were left with the more expensive students to educate and with reduced funding with which to do it.

Public education has been the foundation of our merit-driven culture in the U.S for years. Unlike in some other countries, in the U.S. it hasn’t mattered whether your parents were rich, famous or powerful – as a child in America you could get a quality education and your success and failure as an adult depended largely on your willingness to work hard. The approach being pushed by McVaney and possibly supported by the candidates he has bankrolled will turn that American system on its head by giving the children of the wealthy all the advantages and leaving the rest of our society’s children to make due with the scraps.

Fortunately though, Douglas County’s problems have not come to District 51 … yet. The candidates who will be getting our votes — Greg Mikolai, John Williams and Tom Parrish – have raised 89 percent of their campaign donations locally and aren’t beholden to McVaney’s agenda. They are committed to fighting for our public schools and for our kids.

For the sake of all our children, we at Save our Schools hope that you will take the time to get informed and that you will exercise your right to vote in this election.

ROB PIERCE
Grand Junction

MVEA efforts are similar to those of other professional organizations
  
It is too bad that the only thing Rick Wagner and Josh Penry can do to advance their cause is wave the specter of the heavy-handed union thugs flush with money. I doubt this would match the image of your child’s favorite teacher who is most likely a member of the education association.

Indeed, they never question the motives of out-of-town billionaires donating large sums in a local “nonpartisan” race.

Perhaps an honest perspective would be more helpful. The educators of Mesa County join the association for many different reasons: bargaining representation, legal protection, professional development and/or access to discounted professional education materials. The vast majority of members give a minimum optional contribution for political activity. It is a drop in the bucket compared to spending of millionaires and their corporations.

The efforts of the education association are very much like that of other professional organizations representing doctors, lawyers, realtors and others. Our organizations are formed to represent our professional interests by lobbying, providing information and advocating for our members.

Those of us in the education association have spent years working for high quality, pre-service education, fair and thorough evaluation, continued professional development and high standards for professional educators.

Speaking up for our professional career is the right thing to do. We join our organization because we have education and experience to add to the decision-making about our schools.

Our leaders are classroom teachers who can speak knowledgably for us while we are busy in our classrooms. We care deeply about the difference we can make for our children and our community. 

CAROLYN SANDEEN-HALL 
Retired Teacher
Grand Junction

‘Yes’ on Amendment 66By The Daily Sentinel 
Friday, October 18, 2013

There are a multitude of reasons to support Amendment 66, the public-school funding measure on this year’s election ballot. Perhaps most important for voters to understand is that the amendment, which will raise Colorado income taxes, does not push funding for public schools in this state to some extravagant new realm. It will only return funding for K-12 public education to the level it was at in Colorado prior to the recession. And it establishes multiple reforms in doing so.

A net gain for School District 51

Most people locally know that for decades, School District 51 has been at or near the bottom of Colorado school districts in per-pupil funding. Amendment 66 will change that by adding $830 in annual per-pupil funding for the district, plus additional money for low-income and special-needs students.

But there are additional financial benefits for the local school district and its taxpayers. Under the current Colorado school-finance formula, taxpayers here actually send more money to the state than the district receives in reimbursement for schools. Based on several different budget analyses, with the change in school-funding formula under Amendment 66, District 51 would see a net inflow of state education money of $1.5 million to $4.5 million a year.

Tax hit small for most Mesa County residents

A big reason that Mesa County will receive more than it pays is that, despite the claims of Amendment 66 opponents, the amount of additional money most Mesa County residents would pay as a result of Amendment 66 is relatively small, about $10 a month.

The amendment would boost state income taxes from the current rate of 4.63 percent to two new levels — 5 percent on the first $75,000 of taxable income and 5.9 percent on any taxable income over $75,000. So, if you’re a well-to-do family with taxable income of more than $100,000 a year, you will see a robust increase in your income taxes.

But most Mesa County residents don’t make that much money. The median household income in this county is $52,986 a year. Based on that income level, the average amount Mesa County households will pay is $122 per year — about $10 per month.

Statewide changes to reform education

Amendment 66 establishes a new funding requirement for public education by mandating that 43 percent of state income tax, sales tax and excise tax revenue be set aside annually to pay for public education. Although we’re not fans of budget measures being enshrined in the state Constitution, thereby limiting the ability of the Legislature to act as necessity dictates, in this case there is a sensible reason for doing so.

While it sets a base percentage that is to be spent on public education each year, Amendment 66 also repeals the requirements of Amendment 23. That constitutional amendment requires that per-pupil funding for education increase every year by at least the rate of inflation, and it contained no accountability requirements for how the additional money is spent.

In contrast, Amendment 66 requires the state to prepare a return-on-investment study and a cost study to help identify problems that affect student and school district performance. Additionally, the state is mandated to make detailed spending data available to the public regarding each school district and individual school. That’s information that is not readily available now.

The ballot measure, working in tandem with Senate Bill 213 that was passed by the Legislature this year, will also make a number of other needed changes in school operations.

For example, it provides increased funding for kindergarten and preschool programs. It also allocates money to help school districts implement earlier reforms, such as the 2010 measure that eliminates teacher tenure but requires evaluations of all teachers and principals. Finally, it changes the way a school district’s population is calculated. Instead of basing population on the number of students who show up a few days each October, per-pupil funding will be based on a district’s average daily enrollment throughout the year.

All of these are sensible reforms that, combined with restoring school funding to pre-2009 levels, will help improve schools statewide, and especially in District 51.

Vote “Yes” on Amendment 66.