School Board Members,

It is my understanding that the issue of grand-fathering of students may be decided at tonight's meeting. I assume this vote subsequently confirms the (new?) boundary issues of middle and high school students. My eldest daughter is currently a ninth grader at East and it is our strong desire to
have her finish her remaining years at this school. She has shown maturity beyond her years as she has worked hard to forge a path in academics and athletics. Her long range planning, commitment and peer support should not be considered anything less than the current sophomore and junior students at the school who may or may not be considered for transfer.

The proposed long range plan will effect my youngest daughter as well. She is currently a fifth grade student at Woodland Middle School and as a family we have reconciled to the fact that she will more than likely face a
transfer to the Central Corridor. What I am advocating is a fiscal plan that allows for maintaining the current enrollment of freshmen for all high schools through their senior year.

I want you to understand, as an operations manager for a large company, I FULLY appreciate and understand the budgeting process and corrective action phase of addressing deficits. I have long been a proponent of long range planning in the school district and see the current anticipated deficit and public awareness as a catalyst to a long range plan for this school district. What I am troubled by is the last 45 day blitz of activity and proposed plans. Where and who was chair of the committee for long range
planning during the time of plan development, and was the board not represented during the process as liaison? Could this process been handled better? Yes.

Eliminate emotion in the public by providing us HARD numbers for multiple plans, comparing each plan's cost against facility and curriculum long term development. -The public outcry can be managed by providing hard facts and
numbers. This is all about cost. You have seen the public reaction, now put the ball back in the public's hands with hard numbers that will make it clear to everyone outraged person that if status quo, or plan a,b or c is what is desired, be prepared to pay for it. It is my opinion that the public in general does not yet appreciate that very point. I for one, as a native Duluthian and proponent of the public schools, will stand behind any informed consensus that incurs reasonable tax based increases to cover the sustained strength of our district. The public is mistakenly looking to
you and the administration to grant out-of-hand what is desired. Provide the plans we desire, and in no uncertain terms, demand that we are aware and prepared to pay for what it will cost.

Thank you for your continued dedication.

J O