Precinct by precinct analysis shows a complicated picture, next potential vote this coming February

By Joseph Back

It wasn’t quite the same as in October 1959.

Back then, 2,483 of a total 2,981 voters (83.29 percent) chose ‘yes’ when asked to pass a referendum to approve four elementary schools and the conversion of Oltman to a junior high.

This time around, turnout was higher, as was the opposition. With the earliest any new school bond referendum could come before voters being February of 2023, a complicated picture emerges from the present totals, when taking into account each voting precinct and overlapping school boundaries, with variation showing both between and within municipal borders.

On a surface level, the ‘yes’ vote fell short by a total of 3,527 votes otherwise needed to make majority on Tuesday August 9, majority being the standard for passage. It missed that standard by just under 15 percent of the overall total, with voters rejecting said bond by a roughly 2-to-1 margin, 14,834 ‘no’ votes (65.59 percent of the total) to 7,782 who voted ‘yes’ (34.4 percent of the total).

Breaking things down in turn by community, the closest the bond came to passage was in Woodbury, with 5,241 ‘yes’ votes and 6,672 ‘no’ votes. The second closest in percentage terms was the Town of Denmark , with three ‘yes’ votes and six ‘no’ votes, for 33 percent in the ‘yes’ column.

Following Denmark was Cottage Grove, with a 26.2 percent of voter’s choosing ‘yes’ and the balance choosing ‘no,’ the vote totals city wide showed 2,264 in favor and 6,388 against.

From Cottage Grove it’s on to Afton, where 15 voters chose ‘yes,’ and 43 chose ‘no.’ On Grey Cloud Island the report was 17 in favor and 81 against, for 17.3 percent.

Next up for ballot returns is St. Paul Park, with three voting precincts and a total city wide of 15.1 percent or 157 voters in favor, with the balance (of 881 voters) being against. Opposition in terms of percentage was strongest within Newport, with 85 voting ‘yes’ and 778 voting ‘no.’ Newport, Afton, Denmark, and Grey Cloud Island each form a single precinct for each community, while

See VOTERS Page 2

Cars back up for an exit detour on Highway 61, seen above near the pedestrian footbridge off Hastings Avenue. Photo by Joseph Back. VOTERS

FROM PAGE 1

returns in Cottage Grove, St. Paul Park and Woodbury showed variations by polling place and geography.

Starting in Cottage Grove precinct 1, the vote was 637 in favor and 1,652 against, overlapping in precinct boundaries with attendance at Cottage Grove, Crestview, and Grey Cloud Elementary Schools, and touching on Newport.

The second highest opposition within Cottage Grove and the referendum generally came from precinct 5, centering on Ravine Regional Park and overlapping precinct boundaries with attendance at Hillside and Armstrong Elementary Schools. The vote in Cottage Grove precinct 5 was 354 in favor and 1,063 against.

Third in opposition to the August 9 bond referendum for individual vote totals was Newport, with 693 more ‘no’ votes than ‘yes’ votes, measured as a whole.

Fourth in opposition to the August 9 bond referendum was Cottage Grove precinct 6, overlapping precinct boundaries with Pullman and Pine Hill elementary schools. The vote in Cottage Grove Precinct 6 was 312 in favor and 1,002 against.

The referendum also saw strong opposition in Cottage Grove Precinct 4, overlapping in boundaries with Armstrong and Hillside Elementary. The vote in Cottage Grove Precinct 4 was 206 in favor and 856 against.

Shifting from Cottage Grove to Woodbury, the referendum took three precincts, albeit with relatively slim margins.

The precincts it took in Woodbury were Precinct 03, Precinct 08, and Precinct 15, being spread across the city and not adjoining one another.

As to Precinct 03, the overall ‘yes’ votes outnumbered ‘no’ votes by 47, while in Precinct 08 the yes-no margin was 28 more in favor than against. Precinct 15 passed with a single vote (548 ‘yes’ to 547 ‘no’) more in favor than against.

Matching the precincts where it passed to attendance boundaries, Precinct 03 includes a small part served by Newport Elementary with the remainder served by Woodbury and Royal Oaks. Precinct 08 overlaps with Royal Oaks Elementary attendance, along with a portion in ISD 834 to the north.

Precinct 15 overlaps with attendance boundaries for Red Rock, Liberty Ridge, and Bailey Elementary schools, with each of the 16 elementary schools (counting Nuevas Fronteras) feeding in turn to specific middle schools and then high schools.

Nuevas Fronteras, however, has no attendance boundary.

Coming in to close out statistical analysis is St. Paul Park. Split into three voting precincts that touch on Pullman (Precinct 1 and 2) and Pine Hill Elementary (Precinct 3), the vote was most opposed where St. Paul Park touches on Newport, in Precinct 1. Results for Precinct 1 showed 32 in favor and 223 against. Shifting to precinct 2 the numbers were slightly more favorable, with 53 voters choosing ‘yes’ and 304 choosing ‘no.’ In Precinct 3 the vote was 72 in favor to 354 against.

As to the townships, these are the elementary attendance boundaries that extend to each:

• Grey Cloud Island – Pine Hill Elementary

• Afton – Liberty Ridge Elementary • Denmark – Grey Cloud Elementary None of the townships approved the $4362.66 million referendum ask. As to the school district, ISD 833 communications director Pepe Barton gave a response following ballot returns.

“The bond is a majority vote,” he said. As to what the South Washington County Schools plans in the weeks and months ahead, Barton had the following to share.

“SoWashCo Schools will spend time in the coming weeks and months to regroup and gather feedback from our staff, families and communities to revise the current 10-year facility plan,” he said. “Our current priority is on the eight schools currently at 95 percent capacity or more this coming school year. We will work with our school and district staff to identify shortterm adjustments to ease congestion and overcrowding as needed.”

Lastly and regarding a new policy on ‘negative meal balance’ reported on in last week’s Journal, Barton had the following to say.

“The negative meal charge policy is a new requirement from the USDA, which oversees school meals. This simply puts our current practices into school board policy to meet the USDA requirement.” The board meets next in regular monthly session on August 25.