Published: May 26, 2009 05:11 pm      

LETTERS: May 26, 2009

Reader disgusted by money thrown at Daeschner



When I thought things with our school board could not get any worse, they hire a new superintendent and pay him nearly $100,000 more than our last superintendent. With the national economy down, unemployment at all-time highs and the cutting of teachers, aides and other staff, six out of the seven members of the Greater Clark County Schools board made a very fiscally irresponsible decision to pay Stephen Daeschner $225,000 a year. That’s not including the $1,500 a month living expenses, for up to two years or until he sells his house in Illinois.

So, for the next two years, the taxpayers are on the hook for up to $243,000 a year if he doesn’t sell his house. That is more than the superintendent of Indianapolis Public Schools makes, who is paid $194,000 and has more than 34,000 students. Greater Clark has around 11,000 students, which is less than a third of what Indianapolis Public Schools has in terms of students.

Just more than a month ago, Missy DeArk gave a several minute speech at the April 14 school board meeting about being fiscally responsible. She said that the money situation was a very scary thing for the corporation right now, and that state government was experiencing a 15 percent decrease in revenue, and that the corporation has been told they should expect a decrease in funding for the next several years. She also asked that the public to be patient with the school board while they try to be fiscally responsible. So is spending nearly 58 percent more on a superintendent being fiscally responsible?

From what has been reported in the media, part of his salary will come from donations from the private sector. To me, this is a conflict of interest. When one of these private donors is in the running for a contract with Greater Clark, will they be awarded contracts because they donated to the cause or because they are the best for the job?

Also, what happens when these private donors experience hard times because of the economy and cannot donate?

Then, that amount of the money falls back on the taxpayers.

I am not against Dr. Daeschner being the superintendent, I am against the contracted amount he is being paid.

In closing, I would like to thank Christina Gilkey for being the only member of the Greater Clark school board to act in a fiscally responsible way when she voted no on the contract that was being offered. I would also like to ask my fellow Greater Clark taxpayers and voters to remember the six members who voted yes on a fiscally irresponsible contract at election time. Stand up Clark County taxpayers — it is our money that they are spending!

— Ken Smith, Jeffersonville





USDA’s mandatory program infringes on Americans’ rights



As a former staffer of U.S. Congressman Mike Sodrel, I followed and have continued to follow the progress of the National Animal Identification System. The program was developed with the overlaying intentions for tracking the movement of all livestock and exotic animals for recreation, domestic use and commercial sale.

The identification system is at best a feel-good program that will do virtually nothing to safeguard animal health, its alleged purpose. Rather, the system will drive small farms, ranches, family businesses and Amish and Mennonite communities out of business.

• The program will increase our vulnerability by reducing options for decentralized local foods, by expanding the roll of inhumane corporate farms.

• It will destroy personal property rights. The program considers all chipped animals as part of the “national herd,” and indicates the government’s vision is that no one will be allowed to own animals or do anything with them without the government’s permission.

• It will destroy personal privacy rights. The infrastructure, whose price will be born by the taxpayer and animals owners, will allow the government to conduct a large-scale, computer-aided surveillance of U.S. citizens under the guise of public health. Imagine, through this program, the government will learn your movements, your business dealings, your family practices and habits, your religious customs and beliefs and you will be forced to sacrifice your personal privacy, which is your right, just so you can own an animal.

• This program will open new loopholes to our national security. Not only will the top 5 percent to 10 percent of corporate farms own the majority of the nation’s food supply — which overcrowds animals in inhumane stock yards, making the animals more susceptible to disease and poisoning — but the advent tracking chips also will expose our nations livestock to a whole new type of attack — hackers.

• Lastly, the system will carry with it a price tag and expansion of government that can only be borne by the consumer through food costs, owner in farming costs and taxpayer due to administrative costs.

Urge your U.S. representative and senator to put an end to this program. Show your support for your rights, local food and farms, and the human treatment of animals. Attend the USDA’s Listening Session in Louisville on Friday, May 22, and voice your opinion. You can preregister at http://farmandranchfreedom.org/content/federal-updates.

— Sam Wamsley, Georgetown