GilfordGrok

Absolutely nobody is against affordable senior housing. As I travel around town, meeting the petition signers to slow down or halt the Gilford Village Knolls 3 project, I’m meeting quite a variety of people. I am meeting them personally for two reasons; I want the signers to know that the promoters of this development are going to make a lot of noise to protect their self serving mission and some of those people are actually encouraging people to tear down the petitions.

I thought that I was going to have to explain that the petition is not against seniors but much to surprise everyone of them clearly gets that point. I have received many emails from people eager to stop the growth of “special” tax free communities. They understand the connection between relieving certain people of taxes and placing that burden onto others. Most are seniors themselves and understand that if this sort of thing were to continue, their taxes will force them out of their homes. Ironically, nearly all of them understand the citizens that make up these communities will have no difficulty supporting all spending proposals at the polls because they will have no responsibility to pay for that spending. This will obviously place even more of a burden on those working families that are left with the bill. Once these communities are established there is absolutely nothing to stop their support of spending for all of time!   

Posted by Terry S. at 08:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

My kids are out of the school system, so why should I care about what goes in it now?  Some might say "why bother?", it's over!  No worries, right?

Wrong.

I do care because I do see a breakdown of what the educational system, nationwide, is producing as its product - knowledgeable kids ready to compete globally.  Studies have shown that US students are not meeting the challenge; I hardly believe that our children are absorbing stupid pills without our knowing about it.

Rather, it is partly a lack of high expections, high standards, "educational mismanagement', an instant gratification society (results without the effort), parents not always demanding more from their kids and not support teachers, and teachers not having the disciplinary tools to "make it stick".

We as a society, wanting only the best for our children, always seems to be looking for that next "magic" bullet.  Looking to provide that "next better" environment, we are willing to accept the next message from the educational experts. 

We all want better, but I agree with Margo Weeks at the last School Board meeting, that yet another program is not going to be that "next better" thing (Daily Sun). 

However, Weeks remained skeptical. She noted that despite a number of initiatives to boost test scores, “they have remained the same” and asked “how will another layer of programs, expectations and requirements improve performance? If you can’t manage what we have,” she continued, “what is another program going to do for us?” 

All educational programs have a philosophy, stated or not; IB is no different (in fact, Dr. DiMinico has said as such (paraphrasing) "AP is a set of classes, IB is a philosophy - and not one that is that is friendly to America, our traditions, or our values.  After doing some no small amount of research, it is not (as Arthur Pontes of the Sturgis School said over and over and over again) an American philosophy.

Kurt Webber got it wrong during the meeting when a number of the public spoke against the IB - his rant missed the point:

When the discussion returned to the board, Kurt Webber described suspicion of the “I word, international” as “outdated thinking. The ugly American is alive and well.” He said the board should have “no problem with a curriculum that would expose students to the idea that they live in a world where 5.8 billion people live in different countries.” A graduate of the United States Military Academy, he emphasized that West Point has added a signifi cant international dimension to its curriculum and training. “The I of IB doesn’t scare me at all and it doesn’t scare the U.S. Army,” he proclaimed. “And I don’t see why it should scare people in Gilford.”

To set the stage straight, it is NOT that we need to shut our minds towards the world at large - we do need to know and understand other cultures.  That does not, however, mean that we subsume our culture to anyone else's, that we take what has made this country great and throw it under the bus for the sake of Multiculturalism.  I dare say that what is taught at West Point is not from an international foundation, but from an American one.

And it is that very point that causes concern - the IB program, if followed to the letter and spirit, teaches not from an American perspective but from an other-than-American one.  Learn about other nations, cultures, languages - sure!  But not by bringing in a philosophy that does not hold up American ideals.

From EdWatch, a good summary (bolded emphasis mine):

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free,"

- Ronald Reagan.

Patriotic Americans view our American system of rights, government and freedom, although imperfect, as the best system. Many scoff at those who believe our citizens will willingly accept global government.  If the education establishment continues its agenda of undermining the American system through programs like the International Baccalaureate (IB), our young people will have no objection to global governance.

IB's support of global governance and promotion of world citizenship over U.S.  citizenship is made clear by the words of its directors.  "International Baccalaureate school curriculum remains committed to changing children's values so they think globally, rather than in parochial national terms from their own country's viewpoint", retired IB director-general George Walker said. {The Washington Times, George Archibald, 1-18-04}.

Changing childrens' values?  And what if they run counter to that of their parents?   "Parochial" - a nice way of callously putting aside the ideals of our Declaration and Constitution. Sorry, but I want our children to be proud of this country, its history, and the ideas that still has legal immigrants coming here from all over the world to live and have a better life. 

This fall Monique Siefried, the current director said, "We should not be seen as an organization steeped predominately in Western Culture." {IB website}

Continue reading "IB - the connection and why Gilford should say no." »

Posted by Skip at 07:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

To all the letter writers that have missed the point on the petition to stop the sale of the Potter Hill Road property:

It's NOT about being against the seniors!

Heck, how many live in my neighborhood?

It's about a town facilitating a group of people that will live property tax free within a system of government funded by those same taxes-- and that's NOT FAIR!!!!!

Don't forget, for every citizen granted this special right, the rest of us have to take up the slack.

And here's the other problem: These people that don't pay property taxes like the rest of us will still get the right to vote on spending matters before the town. As I said here on this blog a while back, this seems to be a way for Gilford's big spenders to do an end-run around SB2. Why would people that don't pay taxes ever feel the need to say NO?

Enough is enough.

Are we to the point now here in Gilford that, if we follow the recent logic put forth by one of our Selectmen, we consider family homes somehow bad, and group-type communal homes GOOD? I don't think so. If I want that, I'll move to Red China or the Former Soviet Union.

Additionally, I don't feel in any way "obligated" to help people create systems by which certain classes of Gilford residents will benefit at the expense of others.

The only way I could ever accept more of these developments here in our town is if those that live in them are NOT allowed to vote on town and school matters. And since that can't happen, then the next best thing is to simply prevent them from creating any more tax havens.

In this case, where the town owns the land, it seems as though it can be stopped. Please join me in signing Terry's petition.

NO TAXPAYER-FUNDED TAX-FREE LIVING IN GILFORD. NO WAY!!!!

Posted by Doug at 08:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

On Friday students gathered at Carpy Field with their umbrellas before marching through downtown and arriving back at Carpy Field, where they had a hamburger lunch. On the way students flashed peace signs and some could be heard chanting, “No more war.”

Don't worry, though, because it's all thanks to St. Helena's

adoption of the International Baccalaureate program, which teaches students how to be a part of a global community.

Ugh! You'll cringe when you learn how deeply into local schools UNESCO and the UN have driven. Is this what parents want from their children's schools? If they only knew! More recommended reading here. Community theme pdf here (note freedom fighter reference). Here in Gilford, when promoting the program, the Superintendent mentions, according to meeting minutes that large portions of its education philosophy follow Dewy very closely. Find out about Dewey here. Yikes!

If you are a parent with a child in school-- government or PRIVATE, you need to be on the watch for IB. You need to understand what it really means, and what it seeks to do to your child. The school board is looking at this NOW! You need to understand what is happening!

Click here to read more on an earlier posting at GraniteGrok...

Posted by Doug at 04:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

It seems the news papers are full of articles about the so called outside agencies and their constant need for money. To be perfectly clear, the issue was not about the worthiness of the cause but rather the use of tax dollars under penalty of the loss of your home. It is also very clear that these agencies receive money from the County and State in some cases. As we all recall, the voters of Gilford spoke on this issue last year and voted down the spending of Gilford tax dollars for several of these agencies. Wouldn’t you think that’s the end of the story? No it’s obviously not, in the era of the constant assault on the hapless tax payer. There are several things worth noting about all these stories. For starters we haven’t seen citizens in need of services roaming the streets at large and causing my taxes to go up, as these outside agencies suggest. The only people pining on about the loss of tax dollars for these agencies are the administrators whose salaries are supported by those dollars. Recently, I received a survey on the social needs of the community. What was glowingly absent from this survey was the ability to check an answer stating that I feel the current service level is adequate or in surplus. The survey is rigged to provide the service providers with a result that obviously supports the need for more services. Additionally, I find it odd that politicians hear only what they want to hear from the tax payer. For example; The Gilford Selectmen claim the lack of residents voicing opposition to allowing a tax exempt “affordable senior housing” community is an endorsement by the people to approve of such communities. The people have spoken, or in this case not spoken! Now we have the administrators of the outside agencies pleading to reinstate the money after voters clearly rejected the use of tax dollars to support them. Obviously, the voters were uninformed about the importance of these services. So voters are informed when they don’t oppose a tax exempt community but are uniformed when they vote against funding outside agencies?

Selectman Grant states that she has “always supported Youth Services and will continue to do so.” I hope that she is referring to the kind of support where individuals can voluntarily contribute to the cause and not the kind of support that sends Gilford tax dollars to these agencies against the will of the voters.

Posted by Terry S. at 08:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Okay, I've been reminded that the Selectmen knew the legal process required to sell the Potter Hill land. Actually, a Selectman explained the process to me prior to the first public hearing. My comments come from the obvious lack of accurate reporting on the subject. During my travels to China I was able to view the Laconia Daily Sun and other news papers to keep up with the events. The media, who just can't help stumbling all over Selectman Hayes, reported that the selectmen voted to sell the Potter Hill property to Birch Knolls for the purpose of tax exempt senoir housing. The incompetence that I refer to is three fold; 1) Allowing the creation of housing communities that are exempt from contributing to our children's education. 2) Claiming to vote on selling the property when they actually voted to begin the process to sell the property. 3) Mr. Hayes suggesting that Tim Long might not carry out his claim to purchase the lot and build affordable senior housing.

This gives the residents of Gilford until July 14th to produce a petition to require a straight forward bidding process for our land or send it to the voters as a warrant article. 

Anyone interseted in signing this petition should contact me at tstewart@Lr.net  

Posted by Terry S. at 12:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In a moment of total incompetence, led by Kevein Hayes, the selectmen voted to approve the sale of the public's Potter Hill land without following the correct procedure. Apparently someone reminded them that the law requires the Conservation Commision and Planning Committees approve the sale of land prior to the vote. Ooops! Now they are quickly moving to do it right and tlhe people have one last chance to object to this move on June 25th at 7:00 PM.

Keep in mind that this will exempt a growing community from investing in our children's future. I'm also wondering how many of the residents of this future community were ever Gilford residents?

If the Selectmen do not hear any opposition, as is the case right now, then they will really have no choice but to approve this sale. This is the last chance to speak out. It is simple math; when your school costs rise and there are less people to help to pay the investment, your taxes will increase!!!!

Posted by Terry S. at 11:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)