Live chat: Mt. Diablo Unified School District issues, Wednesday, July 28, 2010, 11 a.m.
Posted: 07/26/2010 05:14:34 PM PDT
Updated: 07/26/2010 05:23:06 PM PDT
Join us at 11 a.m. Wednesday, July 28, 2010 for a live chat with Contra Costa Times staff writers Theresa Harrington and Matt Krupnick on issues surrounding the Mt. Diablo Unified School District's bond campaign. Read recent stories by Harrington ("Mt. Diablo trustees approved bond for ballot without knowing which projects were needed") and Krupnick (("Chevron gave $10,000 to Mt. Diablo schools' bond campaign") to learn more.
For more background, visit Harrington's On Assignment blog, and follow Harrington and Krupnick on Twitter.
I wanted to state this here as well as I have already stated on the Contra Costa Times site. The poll data that I was always referring to was the PowerPoint presentation that was given at the board meeting. I had it on my laptop, read it, and deleted it. Since I am not a CUES member I never saw the whole poll. I told this to Ms. Harrington during the interviews; however, she neglected to report this fact. Because she continues to leave out entire parts of a conversation and only takes snippets of it, I will no longer be taking calls from her to answer her questions.
ReplyDeleteThe Times has consistently displayed their bias in covering the MSUSD. It's not that they have a desire to see the district fail. They could care less. Really it's about creating controversy so they can sell more papers and ad space. Harrington is not a reporter that actually covers what happens. Rather, she is an opinion writer and wanna be blogger posing as journalist. Her articles are not meant to inform. They are written to inflame in the pursuit of profit.
ReplyDeleteSo all of you MDUSD parents who love to criticize the district, beware of these hacks who don't share your view but rather are using your emotion for their own gain...
Sherry, I am not sure this is a good time for you to go into hibernation. Actually, Theresa may be your best friend, especially if she tape recorded your comments -- maybe you should tape record all your comments to her to disprove her. I don't doubt that you had the Powerpoint. But I think this whole Bondgate will eventually uncover lies and expose the truth -- only you and a few others really know what that is, until the documents reveal otherwise. If I were you, you may not want to be standing on the same deck of the ship as GE or PS or SL. Were you the female board member that joined GE, PS and SL at the Buttercup Restaraunt following the contentious school meeting, I think in early March, where special education cuts were discussed ? Well founded rumor has it that the waitress, really a school teacher moonlighting to make ends meet, overheard school business being discussed and she reported it to the Union. Or was it Linda ? Sherry, if Theresa is able to prove any of these things, it could severely damage the integrity of the district and what you stand for. Sherry, let me suggest a different course of action. Sit down with Theresa and tell the whole truth and give her the documents she wants. The good book says the truth will make us free. It may save the district and the children whose education you are charged with providing.
ReplyDeleteDoctor J
I have no documents to give. The PowerPoint was the one shown at the board meeting. If she taped my phone conversation as you imply, then I was not informed of the recording. I have nothing to hide in the interview but I would question the ethics of a journalist taping an interview without informing the interviewee.
ReplyDeleteJohn 8:32 refers to Christ. Christ is the truth and it he who sets us free.
ReplyDeleteThe one thing that keeps me from going insane is knowing that I am not telling untruths. Unlike you Dr J I am using my name and telling the truth.
Sherry, I posted this on CC Times because with all due respect for your integrity, I would like you to clarify something that I think is unclear by your statements. This is especially so, with your two statements above. I understand you say you now have no documents in your possession at this time. Other than the Powerpoint you describe, did you at any time have or read all or part of the polling data which you said was paid for by the committee ? Your clarification will go a long way in resolving this issue for me. BTW, I have no idea if Theresa has tape recorded you or not. And I am no Bible expert either.
ReplyDeleteVery well said Sherry. I'm so disappointed in those who are determined to find a story where there is none.
ReplyDeleteForgot to sign, sorry.
ReplyDeleteDoctor J
PS Sherry, I always tell the truth. I am a little shocked you didn't answer my question about if that was you at the Buttercup Meeting so I must presume it was unless denied. It is intriguing how frequently you have been quoting the Brown Act lately. If that was you at the Buttercup, what were you thinking and why didn't you leave.
As I stated on by Contra Costa Times post, the only PowerPoint I had was what was presented at the board meeting. This is the only information that I received or viewed. I was at a YVHS PTSA meeting when two CUES members (again neither of them board members) attended in order to answer questions from the parents of the community. I was attending the meeting because I was the president of the YVHS PTSA.
ReplyDeleteDoctor J,
ReplyDeleteAre you talking about the CAC meeting where some board members walked out after being verbally attacked by the audience. For those at the CAC they will remember that I stayed at the meeting. I did not leave when other board members left. I stayed to hear the concerns of the CAC as a result of the MGT meeting. The CAC meeting was to discuss the results of the MGT study and for the CAC members to state their concern.
For those of you interested both the CAC and PAC meetings are posted appropriately so that any or all board members can attend and not be in violation of the Brown Act.
Sherry, I am not sure what meeting you called it, but there was a meeting at the Buttercup where a third Board member attended along with the Supt. Were you there or not at the Buttercup with two other Board members and the Supt ?
ReplyDeleteDoctor J
''Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive'' Sir Walter Scott couldn't have said it better. To Sherry and every other Board member, its time to tell the TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. Lets save our district and the kids.
ReplyDelete''Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive'' Sir Walter Scott couldn't have said it better. To Sherry and every other Board member, its time to tell the TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. Lets save our district and the kids.
ReplyDeleteDoctor J
A meeting like that has Brown Act violation written all over it.
ReplyDeleteHow can I go about finding out who the third board member present at that meeting was?
You can blame the CCTimes for bias but that bias would not exist if this campaign was not draped in mis-truths from the very beginning and in so many ways.
ReplyDeleteIf any district administrator or board member does not believe that, then release the polling data.
I've seen it. There is nothing in the poll itself that supports Greg Rolen's claim that "and the interest in withholding these documents clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosing them." It will however expose any comments made by the Superintendent or the Board about how they made their decision to go forward with the irresponsible financial structure of this bond.
Mr. Rolen I would like to know how this protects the public interest?
Maybe you could also address the semantics of this campaign. Was there really a campaign before the Board approved going forward with the bond? If the decision to commission a poll and the review of polling results were part of the Local Funding Planning Committee meeting on the Willow Creek premises then would that poll be part of a campaign or part of a district meeting to explore the idea of a campaign?
Just curious about how that works?
Linda, would you please share with us who was at the Willow Creek meeting of the MDUSD Local Funding Planning Committee where the poll was commissioned. Lets get to the TRUTH. Perhaps its time for you to give Theresa a call.
ReplyDeleteDoctor J
Frankly as a parent and voter in the MDUSD I don't care about polling results. I see the need every day in our schools. We as a community failed to pass a parcel tax. It was obvious to me that the next step was the Bond Measure, which I am glad passed.
ReplyDeleteI have had a CC Times subscription for 30 years, as of today it will be canceled.
Doctor J, did you apply to be on the Oversight Committee?
I agree with Anon 10:10. I will let the CC Times know exactly why my subscription is being canceled.
Amazing. Passing a Bond measure without clear Polling information. Pulling a number out of thin air (not based on what the schools really needed), basically saying let's just continue the tax rate for 40+ years and we can spend some 300 Million on whatever groups donate to our cause. Who care if it costs taxpayers 1.8 billion.
ReplyDeleteSherry, I work in business, as you do. I never delete anything. I find it suspect that you deleted the presentation right after you viewed it.
If a powerpoint presentation was given at a board meeting shouldn't it be online? It would be public. But that is not what is being sought right now.
ReplyDeleteI tried to look back at past board agendas and maybe I haven't gone back far enough to see the powerpoint that sherry mentions...
But I think the issue is the detailed poll questions/results, not the powerpoint presentation itself, right?
@MDUSDparents
ReplyDeleteCorrect. As Linda said, who has seen it, " It will however expose any comments made by the Superintendent or the Board about how they made their decision to go forward with the irresponsible financial structure of this bond."
Apparently the Powerpoint was just a proaganda tool that used some of the data to support the need for a bond and ignored other data so not all Board members had a clear picture of what they were voting for. Taking Sherry at her word, she says she thought the Powerpoint was the entire poll results. It wasn't and other Board members knew that and concealed that from others. In my book, that is pure deception and a violation of the public trust. Those Board members and the Supt are hiding under rocks to avoid answering questions about the truth. That is why we are dependent upon Theresa and the CC Times to uncover the truth under the First Amendement.
Doctor J
Dr. J
ReplyDeleteI don't believe the poll has anything in it that does not support going forward with the bond. The exposure to the district is the fact that they claim the community (the sample polled) chose the long-term expensive option, implying that they were provided a choice. In reality the question was worded along the lines of - "Would you support a bond measure that would provide x, y, and z without increasing your current rate." I am using my own words but that is the jest of the question. 67% of those asked said, "yes"... go figure.
My issue with this campaign is what seems to be the idea that the end justifies any means.
Linda, I understand your position -- but there were clear choices on the bond funding and payback -- and the whole Board was not given those choices. As Dick Allen was quoted saying, those kind of choices should have had public vetting before the Board voted. The fact that there was a poll commissioned by a MDUSD committee, and only a couple of Board members had access to it, and didn't provide access to others, even to the point Sherry thought the Powerpoint was the entire poll, is indicative of the concealment and hide the ball behind the whole bond passage. If the public had all of this information before the election, perhaps the election results would have been different. This Board has a long history of shooting from the hip and voting without sufficient information -- have we already forgot about Nugentgate ?
ReplyDeleteDoctor J
I don't know why Greg Rolen won't release the data. Perhaps he should be clear about the public's interest in it.
ReplyDeleteI am a little put off by Dick Allen's claim that it's always good to be honest. How about competent?
Dick, with all due respect, you, Linda and Gary have been on the board for a long time. Why didn't you do your job and ask "IS THERE ANY OTHER OPTION AVAILABLE?" at the time of the vote.
It smells funny to have a unanimous vote by the board and now claim that honesty is the best policy.
Perhaps all that authority that was previously given to Gary McHenry has crept into the board's mindset. To me, that is not doing their job.
Sherry- I believe that you are an honest person as I have seen you do plenty for the district.
Is there a reason why you aren't answering the Buttercup grill question? It would be a Brown Act violation if it went down the way you say.
Of course, the teacher/waitress might have mistaken someone for you or have an axe to grind with the district, so let's wait to hear the whole story on that.
By the way, I have been involved in the district for years and the reporters at the CCTimes have been legendary for getting things wrong. I used to think it had to do with Sue Berg not be accessible to them, but in my own experience of talking to the reporters over the years, they really come off as disinterested in getting all the facts right. I don't know if it is incompetence or sensationalism.
I said, "Is there a reason why you aren't answering the Buttercup grill question? It would be a Brown Act violation if it went down the way you say."
ReplyDeleteI meant if it went down the way Dr. J said.
Annon 10:51 & 10:53 am
ReplyDeleteSherry's silence is deafening.
Doctor J
Dr J
ReplyDeleteI agree, I just wanted to make sure that you understood that the issue with the poll wasn't about the poll itself but about what the district claims it says.
Anon 10:53
ReplyDeleteIn my 9 years as the media contact person in MDUSD I interacted with print and broadcast reporters throughout the Bay Area (and a few beyond) and never found any to be "disinterested in getting all the facts right." Over that period the Times' reporters who closely covered MDUSD--Lisa Schafer, Jackie Burrell, Suzanne Pardington, Shirley Dang, and now Theresa Harrington--all approached their stories professionally, trying to reach and thus report a variety of points of view.
As in any large organization, there are areas of controversy, occasional errors, and debate as well as hundreds of stories of personal achievement. As the district's Communications Specialist, I worked hard to highlight the district's strengths. As a former newspaper reporter/editor myself (and under the direction of the Superintendent), I knew the district had to respond when real and perceived criticism arose. I may have preferred a reporter not cover a story; I may have found and called a reporter's attention to an error or insufficiency in a story. However, I never found a reporter covering MDUSD who wrote to inflame rather than inform. Problem is, sometimes the information is inflammatory--or begins to seem so when reporters' phone calls are not returned and/or requests for information are denied.
Debate about Measure C was lively and sometimes heated during the campaign. And yet the initiative passed easily. Had the poll results been released to the reporter when she first requested them, they would likely have been included in that debate and not been the focus of attention they are today.
District leaders and news reporters really have the same goal: to disseminate information that is accurate and important for the public to know. The relationship between the two seems to have become rather adversarial of late, and that's not helpful to anyone. I know I'm not alone in hoping that, in the interest of a well-informed constituency/readership, they can find a way to work together.
http://mdusd.blogspot.com/2010/07/mdusd-solar.html
ReplyDeleteThis is a must read.
Thank you Susan Berg for your factual summary.
ReplyDeleteAs for GE post on the MDUSD Blog, he reports a multitude of meetings held at various locations, never identifying any at the Supt home, but identifying some at restaurants. Has anyone check their FPPC Form 700's on file to see if any meals or gratuities from Chevron have been reported ?
Doctor J
Sherry, I did report in my story that you told me Friday you never received the poll results and that you thought you had been referring to a PowerPoint presentation and/or a conversation with a consultant.
ReplyDeleteI just spoke to Gary Eberhart and he has agreed to participate in the online chat tomorrow. Sherry, you are also welcome to join the discusion.
Dr. J. Your comments are getting so, so very old!! GE clearly says on his blog if you have any questions ask him on his blog. He's obviously trying to communicate with the public. Or do you expect the board members to read every comment on every blog that you post and comment directly to every question you've asked. The way you've drilled Sherry today if I were a board member I wouldn't answer a single one of your questions, nothing any of them says satisfies you anyway. You are looking for a scandal where there is none! Give it up.
ReplyDeleteHey Annon 5:12. I am not posting to GE's blog. He just wants to identify me and retaliate against me. Won't work. Oldest trick in the blog book. He's been reading this blog -- he could have responded. I accepted his challenge to debate him on CC Times and he chickened out. I haven't drilled Sherry. I asked her one question: Was she at the Buttercup meeting with two other board members and the Supt ? She refused to answer. Interestingly, GE refused to answer a similar question a few weeks ago on CC Times about his attendence at the same meeting. They were caught red handed. Other people, many Sherry supporters, followed up with Sherry on my question. The silence is deafening. Who do you think paid for the Buttercup meeting ? Its probably now a public record since the district did. If there were restaurant meetings with Chevron like GE detailed, there will be paper trails, because GE didn't pay, do you think ? Has anyone checked GE campaign donation list from two years ago ? I wonder if the Chevron activities consitute lobbying leaving another paper trail ?
ReplyDeleteI am not looking for a scandal -- it hit us smack in the face. Secrecy breeds.
Doctor J
Sue Berg- First of all, I like and respect you. I thought you worked hard at your job, and that it was ridiculous that a district our size only had one Communication Specialist who also had other responsibilities.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, your posting definitely took me by surprise. I sat at many a PAC meeting where both you and Gary McHenry criticized reporters at the Times. The feeling that was put out by those comments was that the paper was out to get the district. I am pretty sure that we at the meetings all got that feeling.
I also used to deal with a lot of the reporters a few years ago and I know for a fact that they didn't think you were very responsive to them or their questions.
At the time I sympathized with them, but later on when I was misquoted over and over again, I realized that they just wanted a story.
Even when I called to correct something they had written, they were not very interested. They got their facts wrong, only because they weren't really paying attention to what was being said in the first place. Lazy reporting.
Of course, there were exceptions, but towards the end of Gary's time with the district, I would not characterize the relationship as cozy.
Dr. J- You thanked Sue for her "factual summary". I do not think Sue is lying, but she is definitely looking at the past with rose colored glasses.
It seems like you hold up anything that is said against the district as truth, and anything said in support, suspicious or written by someone who works there.
What is your role in the district? You seem to be on top of these issues. Would you consider running for the school board? It's probably a lot easier to complain and make accusations than put yourself out there trying to make a difference.
Annon 6:23 pm
ReplyDeleteI do make a difference -- every day. And that is unrelated to this blog. These political issues are really distracting from the real mission of the district -- to provide a quality education to every student. Its really not about money; its about leadership and management. The Board members are supposed to set policy -- not micromanage. Implimentation and management of the district is directed by the Supt. Instead we have Board members micromanaging the Supt about their principal. And while you are thinking about it, the other principal transfer that was "aborted" after parents rose up in rebellion -- which member of the Gang of Five had a child at that school ? Just saying . . . I don't know why the Board was thinking they could take a Supt from a 4,000 student district and put him in a 36,000 district -- never having had any real success with student improvement, and expect transformation. I don't know why the board was shocked when six of the 9 schools from Alameda and Contra Costa counties on the "habitually underpeforming list" were from MDUSD. The most shocking part should have been that none of the District office leadership saw it coming either. It was in every years test scores that no one was paying attention to at the Dent Center. If that had happened at Chevron, would heads have rolled out the front door ? I don't think anyone doubts that. What happened at MDUSD ? Musical chairs. That's not leadership. That's not reform.
We have had so many "gates" in just 5 months -- where is the leadership ? It appears the only time the Supt opens his mouth is to change feet. Board take action now. Doctor J
Anon 6:23
ReplyDeleteI respectfully disagree with your recollections of PAC meetings and assessment of my relationship with local reporters. May we now agree not to take up others' time with our differences of opinions?
My point in my previous post, especially on the eve of the "Chat LIVE" in which at least one Board member will participate, was to point out the important relationship between a public agency and the media.
There needs to be some level of trust between the two in order for the public to have accurate information on which to form opinions. Agency officials show their trust by responding to reporters' questions and requests for information. Reporters earn trust by writing well-researched articles that include more than one point of view on a subject.
In regard to the solar project, two reporters have raised questions about the involvement of a solar company before and after the election in which voters approved a tax to fund the project. In his blog, Gary Eberhart has provided some answers and will continue to do so with the reporters and others in tomorrow's chat.
It looks as if a helpful dialogue is about to take place. That has to be good news for the MDUSD community.
This was just posted on CC Times, and I thought it had so much factual meat, that it might be worth checking out if anyone has any friends in West Sacramento or Roseville. Has the Supt tried to hire this lady here yet ? I know he tried to hire his mother in West Sac and that backfired. The Board may not have been able to learn this information before they hired him and should be skeptical if he tries the same here. Here is the post, which I cannot vouch for: "Mr. Lawrence is NOT a leader in any sense of the word. He almost completely destroyed his last District (WUSD) with many of the same antics. He (and his team) kept themselves busy running out the strongest leaders at the schools and concentrated power and money at the district office. His assistant superintendent of Ed services whom he brought over from his last district(Roseville), Sue Brothers alone had full-time 3 administrators at $140,000 each, 6 “teachers on special assignment” and 3 secretaries with well over one million in salaries/benefits in her empire and this in a smallish district. The results were a less then impressive 4 straight years of Program Improvement with almost no gains under his ‘leadership”!"
ReplyDeleteDoctor J
Dr. J. you are a complete whack job!
ReplyDeleteAnnon 10:20 From you, that is a compliment. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteDoctor J
Dr J at 8:31,
ReplyDeleteWhere on the CCTimes site was that comment posted? I couldn't find it. I agree with many of your comments and appreciate your frustration, but be careful not to post information that cannot be validated. It will feed your critics.
Ive been doing this blog since end of 2007 ( I think) .... I like that we can discuss the various school related topics. I've asked for good news and I never get any. Well, I guess that's the nature of the beast. But what I wonder Dr J is how you are involved to make a difference in the schools? You wont say who you are and you indicated you don't want to post on the mdusd.net blog as you feel that will identify you. What do you have to hide? If what you say is true why would you hide behind anonymity ? I have been on various committees both at the district and at the school sites and the board knows who I am. I am not afraid of free and open dialogue and I just don't understand your constant attacks without the willingness to talk face to face with the board... Or to become involved to help effect real solutions. I have met some great people willing to roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty with hard work.... What is your agenda? The truth? I can think of many other (better) ways to get the answers you keep perseverating on than to constantly attack behind an anonymous screen name.
ReplyDeleteAnnon 11:23
ReplyDeleteIt was posted in the "On Assignment Education" comments. Like I said, I couldn't vouch for it, but it contained enough "facts" that I thought someone might see if the information could be verified. And it might be worth remembering in case the Supt tries the same thing here.
@MDUSDparents. The beauty of the Lone Ranger mask is that while I am involved, my identity remains unknown. I will not be recognized at a Board meeting, I will not be recognized at an activity, we may serve on a committee together, we may say hi in the Grocery store, we may be at a school activity together or various activities. My mission is to get us back to the truth, back to being honest and open, and to stop the concealment and deception. For example, we are in financial crisis and need to close some elementary schools. We knew that a year ago -- its the most unpopular thing to do. In the end, it doesn't matter which schools get closed; its just important that we get the job done. The Board made up all kinds of excuses why to wait until after the election to do that. We should have had our committees formed and the work done over a year ago, and then a decision could have been made or postponed. Instead, look at all the crap the board has been expending itself on and where are we ? Same place we were two years ago. They talk transparency and have secret meetings. They blast McHenry for not having a Strategic Plan and hire a guy who doesn't believe in having one either. Why didn't they form a Strategic Plan committee when McHenry left ? 18 months and we could have had one. if they hired the wrong guy, lets face it. I haven't heard one word of support for the Supt from the Board. After Nugentgate, Dick Allen should not have to be asking for the hiring protocol in writing; it should have been provided to him. After Buttercupgate, they should say, yeah we did it, it was wrong, and we sent a letter to X admitting our mistake and we will take the consequence. When Theresa makes a public records request, why does the General Counsel sit on it for over a month and still not fully comply ? Its not how open and honest people act. Its time to change behavior or its time to change the people.
Doctor J
Solar panels or student achievement ? Which is more important ? Which gets more attention from the MDUSD Board ? Which gets more attention from the Supt ? In March, both the Board and the Supt plus staff got caught by surprise [pants down] when MDUSD had SIX schools on the habitually underperforming school list -- six of the worst in the state. Why were they surprised ? Spending more time on solar panels than student achievement. Part of the reason is that while a few years ago, the Board did talk Strategic Plan, it was just talk to get rid of McHenry. The Board can talk the talk, but not walk the talk. Neither the Board nor the district have the "vision" of a Strategic Plan. They spend more time on solar panels than student achievement and it shows. Here is one from Seatlle. Its not perfect but its a starting place. Let me wet your whistle with this opening vision from Seattle: "Our Commitment: All Students Achieving
ReplyDeleteTo realize this vision, we must be clear that success means all students
achieving. We must hold ourselves accountable for achievement and growth at
all levels from kindergarten through 12th grade, judging our success by both
closing the achievement gap and accelerating learning for all students.
Over the next five years, our goals include:
88 percent of third-grade st ƒƒ udents meet or exceed
reading standards (up from 72 percent in 2006–2007).
ƒƒ 80 percent of seventh-grade students meet or exceed
math standards (up from 53 percent in 2006–2007).
ƒƒ 75 percent of students graduate from high school in
four years (up from 62 percent in 2006–2007)." You can read it all at seattleschools.org
So Board and Supt, get the vision of a Strategic Plan: every child can learn. Get your priorities straight -- its about student achievement not solar panels. How much creativity does it take to block and copy the Seattle plan and tweak it to MDUSD ?
Doctor J
Dr. J- You are definitely beginning to turn me off even though there are some things you say that might be valid.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, here is a quote of yours from a recent post-
"My mission is to get us back to the truth, back to being honest and open, and to stop the concealment and deception."
You have to admit, that's pretty funny coming from a person making anonymous allegations that he himself says "Like I said, I couldn't vouch for it, but it contained enough "facts" that I thought someone might see if the information could be verified."
You used the word facts in quotes. Um, really? You aren't just throwing things up there to see what sticks?
To me, much of what you are saying is not pertinent to what your other recent post is about: Solar Panels or Student Achievement?
How is providing the "facts" about some alleged doings in the WUSD change student achievement in the MDUSD? You see, you have an axe to grind and it shows.
I don't see how any of your posts further student achievement. You complain about everything and make accusations you can't verify all in the name of doing right by the district.
By the way, your comment about solar panels vs. student achievement seems so surface and off the mark. One of the reasons that the district is pursuing solar panels is to reduce energy costs and take advantage of rebates that will benefit the general fund. The intent being that money could be used to save programs.
I do believe that your comment about the school closure committee is valid. That is something that was discussed, people applied for, and should be put together. We were told it was being pushed back to September.
You make the assertion that the decision to not move forward on it is to protect some board member's electoral hopes. I guess that means Linda and Gary, since Dick isn't running. So all of this obfuscation is to protect two people?
Perhaps there are more pressing things going on, or perhaps the district did drop the ball.
I can tell you one thing though, those families that potentially have to face school closures won't be complaining.
Theresa and Matt- We are looking to you for a fair and balanced discussion.
ReplyDeleteAs you can tell by posts on Claycord and Mister Writer, there are a lot of people who feel like you writing is lacking integrity.
Why say something is legal and then make an issue out of it? We are beleaguered here in the MDUSD and we don't need college freshman reporting to stir us up.
Please consider what your job as a journalists is. If you have to make statements that confirm that laws were adhered to, then why create controvesy?
Anon.. It is linda and paul up for election... Thank you for a well thought post. We can all be passive and aggressive if we want to take the easy way out... Or we can face the issues head on. If doctor j is on any committees my guess is they are not speaking out at all as to do so may reveal themselves... What a shame and a coward.
ReplyDeleteAnnon 8:33
ReplyDeleteMy post was about VISION and Strategic Plan that every child can learn -- a focus on student achievement. I believe you were mixing two separate posts of mine. What is the vision of the Board ? What is the Stategic Plan of the Board ?
Doctor J
Anon 8:55- You are right! So sorry to get that wrong, because I know it was Linda and Paul. I don't even know if Paul will run again, so the election comment is even more ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteDr. J- I didn't mix your posts, I just referred to them both in my post. I even said when I was referring to the second post.
There are many of us who post anonymously here for various reasons, but your posts are of one vein--attack. They are tiresome and as time goes on, they seem more personal than informative.
MDUSD Parent:
ReplyDeleteYou said you have asked to hear good things. I personally have tried to post comments and the blogs. Everytime I do, someone tells me the equivalent of I have no idea what I'm talking about or my head is buried in the sand.
I believe some of the posters on the blog really do not care to hear anything good. How controversail would that be?
I also agree with anon 7:48 who thought we should be focusing this much time and energy on STUDENTS! What a novel idea that would be!
DB
I asked this earlier in another discussion and got no reply. It is a modification of the Seattleschools.org Strategic Plan vision:
ReplyDeleteDo you agree with this Vision for MDUSD ? “At MDUSD,we believe that every student in every school can excel—and it is our responsibility to ensure that every student has that opportunity. While we have strengths to build on, we also must improve in many areas to make this vision a reality.”
Doctor J
Grammar/spelling correction to my earlier post:
ReplyDeleteYou said you have asked to hear good things. I personally have tried to post positive comments here and on Claycord. Everytime I do, someone tells me the equivalent of I have no idea what I'm talking about or my head is buried in the sand.
I believe some of the posters on the blog really do not care to hear anything good. How controversial would that be?
I also agree with anon 7:48 who thought we should be focusing this much time and energy on STUDENTS! What a novel idea that would be!
Sorry for the earlier typos...Guess I was in a hurry.
Hi 8:14 I'm not sure what you've tried to post but I'm not moderating any comments.... I see many baby steps here In The right direction. Hiring procedures were changed after nugent and so far schools seem happy with their appointments this time around. Gary has resurrected the mdusd blog and is communicating information and answering questions about the solar and bond process.
ReplyDeleteThere are many, many negatives for the board members to communicate online but when they stopped, the conspiracy theorists are all out in force now. I hope the communication continues. I thank Gary and sherry for continuing to put their necks out there.
I'm keeping an open mind and will continue to compliment the good things....
mdusdparents, since you have been looking for positive things, I was wondering what your reaction to the Seattle Strategic Plan or to the Vision for MDUSD that I posted, adopted from Seattle ?
ReplyDeleteIt is very interesting that I asked GE yesterday on the CCT live chat what his position was with the Supt on a Strategic Plan and he declined to comment.
Doctor J
Doctor J there is no place for you here. You keep beating the same dead horse. Stop hiding and let us see if you are real or just bs
ReplyDeleteJaime, I am real -- the information I share is credible. I can only continue to do my work if I continue to wear the mask of the Lone Ranger seeking the truth and justice. I am sorry that some of you, and your friends, are afraid of the truth.
ReplyDeleteDoctor J
Good News: In 2 to 3 weeks before school begins, many, many dedicated and terrific MDUSD teachers will take the time to set up their classrooms, create colorful bulletin boards, and prepare for their first days of classes. They will do this on their own time before the "contract" time begins. These teachers care about children and care about giving your children the best possible education no matter what the politics or funding or reporting.
ReplyDeleteLadymar, that is very well said and you are exactly right. Every student in every school can excel
ReplyDeleteDoctor J
Ladymar- I want to thank the teachers for what they do, but please know that in this economic climate, there are many people who are doing a lot more for less money.
ReplyDeleteGetting your classroom set up beforehand makes your job easier. I don't want to diminish the good work that the teachers do, but please be aware that many, many supportive parents are very tired of the union claims that doing something like this is out of the scope of their job or contract.
Especially, the volunteers who help you day in and day out in the classroom.
The time I put in to set up my classroom is completely OUT of the the scope of my contract!!!!
ReplyDeleteI could use the 1/2 day the district provides. My classroom would be clean and bare. My level of committment and professionalism do not allow this. My job is not easier because I provide a warm and comforting environment. My STUDENTS are happier. That's why I do it!
I thank my lucky stars for my volunteers that I have in my classroom! I am able to do things that I could never do without them. I know they are volunteers and there out of the goodness of their hearts. But I volunteer many, many hours of my own time as well. Remember that whenever you see a teacher (or his/her car) at school after contract hours! We are only required to work an extra 30 minutes outside of the school day. So at my school we arrive 30 minutes before school and are "able" to leave with the students. How often do you see that happen?
Anon, you should be ashamed of your comments!
Sorry Anon Teacher- I am nowhere near ashamed of my comments.
ReplyDeletePreparing your classroom might be out of the scope of your contract, but it certainly isn't out of the scope of your job. It's not like you are being asked to clean the campus or bathrooms.
That being said, I do appreciate what teachers do for our children. I have always been a big supporter of teachers and EVERY single one of my kids teachers and principals could tell you the same thing about me.
What I have a problem with, I guess, is that your "contract" tells you that you don't have to work more than 30 minutes outside the school day. Lucky you!
My spouse's job has instituted a furlough system and now they have to do the same amount of work in less time. They also have to pick up the slack for their coworkers who got laid off. They don't get to complain about it because there are plenty of other people standing in line behind them to get their job.
Don't mistake what I am saying as if I don't appreciate teachers. I do, but you may want to open your eyes and ears to the fact that many parent volunteers are getting tired of MDEA's tactics (16 weeks to survey members?.
And FYI, when my kids' school did work to rule, there were no teachers around at the end of the day and none came to extracurricular activities. It was definitely perceived that the teachers were using the kids and parents as scapegoats to help their cause with the district.
If you are a professional, you would do your job to the best of your ability no matter what your contract says. By your own admission, if you didn't take the time to set up your classroom, it would be clean and bare.
You say your level of professionalism and commitment wouldn't allow this to happen, yet you cite your contract as if you are doing it as a favor.
I know it is hard for teachers now that class sizes have increased, but it's no picnic for students and their families either.
I hope you have a good school year.