...President Patricia O’Neill (District 3):
“Sarcastically
I would say we need someone who could walk on water, speaks multiple
languages, can spin gold from straw, if I could conjure up (one). I
think we need a visionary leader, a good manager. I always say I believe
we need a superintendent who’s an educator with a businessman in his
mind, great communication skills.”
On if he/she should be a minority: “You know, I can’t say. I just want the best candidate for MCPS.”...
...Judy Docca (District 1):
Judy Docca declined to respond to the questions because she did not want to comment on the performance of former superintendent Joshua Starr.
“I fail to see how I could be more specific about what I am looking for without you asking, Well, didn't Dr. Starr exhibit these characteristics? I am bound by our agreement not to disclose more than you may receive from Dana Tofig or Brian Edwards with regard to the search.”...
http://www.thesentinel.com/mont/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=1764%3Aboard-of-education-members-weigh-in-on-search&Itemid=766
Is she talking about her attributes?
ReplyDeleteReally Judy? The separation agreement said that only Brian Edwards or Dana Tofig can talk about Starr? Somehow I don't think that was exactly what it said. Only that you wouldn't disparage him.
ReplyDeleteBoard of Education: “I would say we need someone, who could walk and chew gum at the same time, speaks a minimum of one language, can put a spin on negative publicity, if I could conjure up [one]. I think we need a visceral leader (who will take the BOE’s lead), a good manager (as long as he doesn’t try to manage the BOE). I always say I believe we need a superintendent, who we [the BOE] can educate and will mind his own business, assuming he has a mind, great press release skills.”
ReplyDeleteThe agreement says that the Board of Education -- which is a public body -- must not disparage Dr. Starr. However, the agreement does not prevent individual board members from expressing their own opinions about Dr. Starr. Furthermore, there is nothing in state law or regulations that authorizes the BOE to establish a contract on behalf of individual board members -- yet that is exactly what Docca claims prevents her from speaking out.
ReplyDeleteWord is that Kim Statham is going to get the position and that the new reorganization has been structured to give positions to her friends and family members.
ReplyDeleteShe's going to need a couple more leather bags...
DeleteBy spending a substantial portion of her time last year in Maryland instead in of the East Bay, outgoing Oakland schools State Administrator Kim Statham didn't just cheat taxpayers — she cheated nearly forty thousand children. In fact, newly released public records show that the school district under Statham's command shortchanged kids, especially those from low-income families, out of more than $40 million worth of education.
DeleteThis startling fact came to light quietly last week: The district revealed that after it closed the accounting books on its 2006-07 academic year, it was left with huge surpluses in nearly all of its accounts. Public records show that the eye-popping windfall was mostly the result of the district having failed to spend the money allotted to it by the state and federal governments.
In addition, records show that Statham, who is to leave the district next week, had no plans to spend any of the excess cash this year. If the district doesn't spend that money, Oakland students will again be cheated out of millions of dollars in government funds designed to improve their education. "It's really unnerving," said teachers' union president Betty Olson-Jones, after learning of the excess funds during a presentation at last week's school board meeting by district interim CFO Leon Glaster. "It's a lot of money."
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/oakland-schools-cash-stash/Content?oid=1084196
I wish our BOE used their brains like you do. Word is that Docca and Durso want Statham and everyone is planning for next year like she will be running the show.
DeleteRestructuring has been set up for 2015-16 that maintains the same failed leaders that Statham presides over as deputy. The same failed achievement gap programs that she lead will continue with the same incompetent directors.
It's no surprise that Barclay or Smondrowski would support Statham and her leather bags. They are no better considering their credit card purchases.. I'm surprised that Ortman-Fouse would vote for her. Thought she had some ethical standards. It didn't take her too long on the board for their corruption to sink in. Say it aint so Jill.
DeleteThe leather bags are just the tip of the iceberg. They covered up all the personal purchases Statham had her secretaries make on her behalf on their credit cards.
DeleteI would like to say something about why, in my opinion, we have the Board that we have.
ReplyDeleteWhat I am about to say may be construed as sounding like I am anti-teacher, or anti-union in general, and I believe I am not. I am a progressive leftie who thinks our economy would be better for working people if labor unions were stronger. I have volunteered in MCPS schools for many years, including outside my neighborhood and outside of classes and grades where my kids are. I love MCPS teachers and I think they do great work. I don't think they are well served by their union in elections, however.
What I want to raise as an issue is the Apple Ballot, and the role it plays in our elections for the Board of Education. The Apple Ballot is the slate of candidates that are endorsed by the Montgomery County Educational Association, the teachers' union. Schools close on election day and so teachers have the day off, and they often are found outside polling places, handing out these ballots to voters on their way in to vote.
In the last election, MCEA endorsed all the incumbents (there were 4 races and 3 had incumbents). They chose to endorse them BEFORE the filing deadline for challengers, so they were choosing the incumbents without knowing who the other choices might be. MCEA also made these choices without polling its membership to ask all the teachers what they thought. So the Apple Ballot did not represent the thoughtful decisions of teachers who knew what their choices were. Yet voters who don't realize this believe that by voting Apple Ballot they are voting to support their teachers.
The Apple Ballot has enormous sway over elections. It is almost impossible to get elected to the Board without the Apple Ballot endorsement (it happens, but it is rare). Many thoughtful and careful parents with years of service to MCPS and MCCPTA try to run for the Board and fail because they don't get on the Apple Ballot.
We are going to continue to have a Board of Idiots so long as the Apple Ballot continues to endorse incumbents and the voters don't know any better.
The way to changing things is (1) know all about all the candidates for Board before you vote, or (2) if you can't do (1), then vote AGAINST the Apple Ballot.
FYI - the Apple Ballots hires teachers/staff from other counties to stand at our voting locations on election day. The people you see are often not even MCPS employees.
DeleteDear Ms. Sartucci,
DeleteYou may be right about that; I don't know. In last November's election the person who handed me the Apple Ballot was an MCPS teacher. I engaged her in conversation, asked her if MCEA had polled its members before making its endorsements, etc. She got very upset with me when she realized I was informed about the way MCEA conducted itself in this election
It's a problem that the board never stated why they did not want to continue with Starr. For that reason, Statham who was a Starr appointee, sees no problem continuing to move forward with all of the same programs and personnel.
ReplyDeleteTwo words: Term Limits
ReplyDeleteAnd all BOE members must have children in the MCPS.
DeleteEven MCPS administrators don't put their kids in MCPS.
DeleteSo the BOE members follow by example.
Delete