Making a Mountain out of a Mole Hill

The following article chronicles "a stir" that was created by a ten-sentence email reply I sent two weeks ago.

Birmingham-Bloomfield Eccentric: Rochester trustee weighs in on BH election (04/27/07)

So here's the whole story...

The Bloomfield Hills School board continues to follow the rest of the school board herd by spending $60,000 on a May election, rather than using it to educate children. The ballot offers candidates for two board seats and a bond proposal.

I have campaigned at several events in support of Jenny and Don Greenwell, two people that I believe would make great board trustees. You can read more about them at http://teamgreenwell.blogspot.com.

I have not campaigned either way for the bond, which if approved (and when combined with sinking fund money) would spend $140 million to build two 1000 pupil high schools.

A tongue-in-cheek email remark - made in response to a questionable strategy suggested by bond supporters- is now being twisted for political purposes.

Don and Jenny are not in support of the bond plan, and I believe they would prefer to look at more cost effective renovations. Naturally, many of the supporters of Don and Jenny do not support the bond.

Because of the overlap, I have received emails from Greenwell supporters who also discuss the bond issues.

In one such email an individual -- whom I did not know -- sent an email describing his experience at what was billed as a public meeting of the Bloomfield YES group (which supports the bond).

In that email, he wrote, "AT 7:00 PM I WAS ASKED BY TRESSA MUCCI, ONE OF THE BLOOMFIELD YES CO-CHAIRS TO LEAVE THE MEETING. I SHOWED HER THE OAKLAND PRESS ARTICLE WHERE IT STATED IT WAS A MEETING 'OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.'"

There was also an item that read as follows, "5.THEY WILL BE PLACING CAMPAIGN INFORMATION ON WINDSHIELDS AT THE SCHOOLS [ I WONDER IF THEY ARE ALLOWED TO USE SCHOOL PROPERTY FOR THAT, AND IF THEY ARE CAN WE DO THE SAME ?]"

I didn't know the writer, but was impressed that he stood his ground, despite being asked to leave. So, I wrote, "Eric, your willingness to infiltrate is admirable and impressive!"

The word "infiltrate" is apparently at the bottom of the tempest in this teapot, and in retrospect, "persevere" or "stand your ground" would have been more accurate, but email communications sometimes forfeit accuracy for spontaneity.

I do believe that Eric was being courageous, and that was the thought I was trying to convey.

Yet the purpose of my note was not to congratulate him. Rather, I was addressing the Bloomfield Yes' proposed plan to put flyers on windshields. The writer had indicated that the superintendent and two board members were also in attendance at that meeting, and I was quite surprised officials would allow that type of political activity at schools. I was also skeptical that they'd allow the opposition the same opportunity.

In the interest of fair play, I suggested that someone from the opposition group contact the superintendent and ask for the same permission, echoing the writer's own comments.

The end.

Again, for the record, I haven't issued any statements on the bond because I believe that is a local taxpayer issue. But, I believe we all have a vested interest in bringing common sense leadership to school boards statewide.

I have been active in trying to support Jenny and Don Greenwell because I believe we need to end this rubber-stamp herd mentality of school boards.

The collective actions of school boards across the state are forcing our government to choose between cuts to other vital state programs and tax increases. We need leaders like Don and Jenny who will move the focus off buildings and adult issues, and back on to children and learning.

For some to suggest that I shouldn't get involved serves as one more example of how the "school insiders" like to think they are somehow different than other elected officials. For example, it is fairly commonplace for one elected official to campaign for another candidate in county commissioner, state senator or representative, and beyond. President Bush -- and President Clinton before him -- frequently campaign(s) for Michigan candidates.

I believe I have a very informed perspective on school governance to offer citizens, and people are free to consider or dismiss my opinion.

This is clearly an effort to amplify what was nothing more than a supportive comment to someone who found himself in an awkward situation. It appears there's an effort to turn this into something bigger than it is for political purposes, and it's puzzling to me why this has become such a fuss.

In the end, those in Bloomfield who are "pro-bond" they are going to be unhappy that I replied to the email, regardless of my choice of words.