The controversy surrounding the firing of Jane Mulholland has swamped the Deafread site the last few days. Today, I visited StatesmanJournal.com which is a website based in Oregon. Jane Mulholland worked for the deaf school in Oregon. Anyway, a man named Forrest Anderson from Salem wrote a letter to the editior. Apparently this is a new twist I came across today, I guess things are just about to get even more interesting.
Firing at deaf school is linked to land lust
January 20, 2007
The firing of Jane Mulholland from the deaf school can be traced straight back to the land the school for the blind sits on. For years this beautiful piece of property across from Bush Park has been coveted by developers. My wife, Marie Anderson (who was blind), and the blind community of Oregon understood this and have fought this battle many times.
I believe Ed Dennis, the quintessential bureaucrat who is not responsible to the voters of Oregon for his actions, fired Jane Mulholland because she did not agree with his plan to transfer the blind children to the deaf school. He has not denied this. Now she will be replaced by someone who agrees with Ed Dennis. With the children gone and the buildings empty, the property will be open for sale and development.
The citizens of Oregon who own the blind school and its land didn't elect Mr. Dennis, but we did elect our representatives and senators who are responsible to us. It's time for them to stand up and be counted and let us know which side they are on -- the deaf and blind children or the developers.
-- Forrest Anderson, Salem
Source: StatesmanJournal.com
I can relate to this situation, though at the deaf school I used to attend, nobody got fired. We did have a land dispute and we lost. A large amount of our land property was used for sport activities and recreations. When I was a student there, a situation came up where a developer already had bought a large amount of the property without the school administration's knowledge. We fought and fought to get the land back, but we ended up losing the land to the developer. It was turned into suburbs for the seniors and the land has been greatly reduced forcing them to cramp sport fields all together. It was really unfortunate that we were forced to deal with this matter.
Let me remind you, this is just a letter in the Opinions section. It may be either true or untrue. Still, it's an interesting twist and knowing how the government can play a game of dirty politics to get what they want, I can't say I'm surprised when something like this happen.
1/20/2007 5:33 PM
Land lust, hmm, good one. My old school, Calif. School for the Deaf - Berkeley relocated to Fremont after inspectors claimed the school was not safe due to possiblities of major earthquakes. University of California Berkeley took over the campus when CSD relocated to Fremont. They wanted the land and astounding hillside views from the campus for a long time and finally got what they wanted. These developers have no morals.
1/21/2007 4:04 PM
Most deaf schools, since they were created so long ago when land was plentiful, are built on prime property. No doubt about that.
The Deaf School in Vancouver, Washington is no different. It is situated on a bluff above the Columbia River and could easily be replaced with nulti-million dollar homes.
However, for many years this school has been coveted by the State to be used for a women's prison! Can you believe that lawbreakers would come first before deaf children? Amazing what this country is coming to!
1/22/2007 3:47 PM
It seems like it's a very common practice among the government-owned schools since they are often on large and valuable properties.
It's really sad to see that we have to deal with this all of the times.
1/22/2007 11:32 PM
At the most recent public meeting with the Oregon State Board of Education on the Mulholland firing, an apparently little known fact was presented to the state officials which apparently set them back just a bit.
It was revealed that the property for the Oregon School for the Blind was DONATED, and that a condition of that donation was that it remain a school for the blind. According to the source at the meeting, should an attempt be made to sell the property for any other purpose, the property was to be given back to the original family estate which donated it in the first place.
Things should be REALLY interesting if this claim is true, no doubt the state lawyers are staying up late mulling over that revelation!