Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Fw: boe email communication - legislation

Expand Messages
  • pamythompson
    --Many board members defer to the experts in this case the central office administrators because the board members consider the central office staff the
    Message 1 of 36 , Dec 30, 2008
      --Many board members defer to the experts in this case the central
      office administrators because the board members consider the central
      office staff the "experts".
      This is a joke , right? This is the fox guarding the hen house
      mentality . When I dealt with central office (currently) I would say
      some of their character was more like inept , incompetent ,
      unprofessional , disfunctional , dishonest , self serving and the
      fact that they are educated boggles the mind . The only thing that
      stood out as expert was the professional courtesy they showed each
      other and their ability to protect their jobs . They all seemed to be
      nice people and professed a general caring and compassion for the
      children they are empowered to serve however their expertise was
      severely lacking both in judgement and commitment to the well being
      of children when their own actions were shown to be detrimental to
      the quality and welfare of our children . The BOE has to be in a
      position to keep the HCPSS in check therefore as elected officials
      there needs to be an open and transparent relationship between the
      BOE and the public whereas we can elect and fire them based on their
      performance and each member of the BOE should submit to this
      transparency or be voted out at the next election . This is the only
      way to ensure quality education and to hold the administration
      accountable for their actions as well as lack of performance .
      Further , again the house attorney is mentioned . If this is the
      case it needs to stop . Legal advise should be given in full (not
      leaning to one side or a predetermined outcome ) and it needs to be
      for the benefit of the students . If the expertise of HCPSS fills it
      needs an attorney then I would concur but they need to obtain one
      privately as needed instead of at public expense as protection from
      their own incompetence .

      Jack

      - In howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com, "The Sola's" <pmbsola@...> wrote:
      >
      > I know a little bit about how central office staff and school board
      members function. Many board members defer to the experts in this
      case the central office administrators because the board members
      consider the central office staff the "experts". By operating from
      this mind set, board members rely on data, analysis, and even policy
      formation by the expert staff members. I do not deny that central
      office staff have a specialty in administration ( those that have an
      advanced degree in Ed. Admin.) and possibly a concentration in other
      areas. So the results are a seamless efficient functioning governing
      structure. This maybe caused by Board members not asking the right
      questions or not hearing the answers given by central office staff
      members. If the board does not ask or question the recommendations
      of the staff,"conflict" is avoided.
      >
      > For example, I raised the issue of transporting children to
      private schools. A board member asked Mark Blum if the board was
      breaking the law. The response was the board is not violating the
      law. In stead of perusing that response, and asking what does the law
      say the issue was dropped. The response was true but only a half
      answer. The law states that the Board has the OPTION of transporting
      or not transporting children to private schools. An example of board
      members not following up responses because an "expert" responded.
      > In a time of budget tightening the board members need to be looking
      for all ways to save money. Perhaps we can begin by looking at how
      many experts we have in the central office staff.
      >
      > Peter Sola
      >
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: Sue and Don
      > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 7:07 PM
      > Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Fw: boe email communication -
      legislation
      >
      >
      >
      > It's disturbing to hear Board members not remembering voting on
      higher raises for executive staff.
      >
      > This is amazingly similar to the corporate quagmire where so many
      board members were asleep at the switch and just buying into whatever
      CEOs said.
      >
      > Let's hope the currently elected BOE members are not similarly
      asleep at the switch, but it is DEEPLY disturbing to hear that they
      do not remember voting on these specifics.
      >
      > Sue Medicus
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: colleendolphin
      > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2008 3:33 PM
      > Subject: [howardpubliced] Re: Fw: boe email communication -
      legislation
      >
      >
      > I actually think the BOE members are the people to blame. They
      are always the "last" word
      > but because of the way the system is set up, they rely heavily
      on the people that work for
      > them. When you look at who those people may be, you may want to
      take a look at the
      > most current salary increases to show you who is valued the
      most. In 2008-2009,
      > although there was enough money to give all Central Office
      Employees a raise of 5-7%,
      > over 99% of the staff received 4%. The positions of
      Superintendent (14.5%), Deputy
      > Superintendent (7%) and Chief of Staff (7%) received much more
      than the others. It seems
      > if these three people do not hold your views, the BOE will not
      hear them (take a look at the
      > flow chart to see how decisions are funneled). In fact, it was
      at a closed meeting that
      > these salaries were decided and when I questioned Mr. Aquino
      about them, he had no
      > recollection of them- he said he'd have to check the notes!
      So.... WHO is deciding what?
      >
      > Most of the people I have had the opportunity to work with at
      Central Office (from the tech
      > department, staff relations, finance, benefits, HVAC, public
      relations, and legal services)
      > are genuinely concerned about the system and students and work
      hard at what they do. I
      > have read many thoughts on this forum about how our system can
      be improved (and
      > especially in light of the most recent criminal charges at Mt.
      Hebron) do not disagree but I
      > do think it needs to start at the top (the BOE). I know they
      are not supposed to micro
      > manage but sometimes power corrupts and management is
      necessary. Maybe Allen will
      > have some new ideas.
      >
      > The only thought I have on the most recent events, is that
      sometimes the students know
      > more than parents and staff. If more people asked them what was
      happening and listened
      > to them (wow, kind of sounds like what I hear many staff
      members say), maybe things
      > could be done before more damage occurs.
      >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Allen,
      > >
      > > Well now you have "standing." It seems
      > > to me that the spirit of a sunshine law would be to show the
      public, the voters,
      > > that the public officials' are doing their jobs, that issues
      are thoroughly
      > > vetted, and that thoughtful debate takes place. I see no
      reason, outside
      > > personnel issues, that members would want to meet behind
      closed
      > > doors.
      > >
      > > Peter Sola
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > +++-
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From:
      > > Allen Dyer
      > >
      > > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > > Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 9:31
      > > AM
      > > Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Fw: boe
      > > email communication - legislation
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > peter,
      > >
      > > the most authoritative answer to your question in
      > > contained in an attorney general opinion that is
      > > over a decade old -- AG Opinion No. 96-016.
      > > see attached.
      > >
      > > i tried for 6 years to get a more authoritative
      > > answer from the courts only to get thrown out due to
      > > a "lack of standing."
      > >
      > > in maryland, there are some things normal
      > > citizens are not meant to know.
      > >
      > > allen
      > >
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: The Sola's
      > >
      > > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > > Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 9:11
      > > AM
      > > Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Fw:
      > > boe email communication - legislation
      > >
      > >
      > > I was not clear, if four board members are
      > > emailing each other or instant mailing each other does that
      constitute a
      > > board meeting?
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: cynthia vaillancourt
      > > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 8:24
      > > PM
      > > Subject: RE: [howardpubliced] Re: Fw:
      > > boe email communication - legislation
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > I don't know whether they want them deleted .... but I do
      believe if
      > > they wanted them NOT to be deleted they could make that
      happen... without
      > > an act of congress (or the legislature for that matter).
      > >
      > > However,
      > > when it comes to the question of how many emails make a
      meeting .... it
      > > seems to me that if all emails were posted publicly then it
      wouldn't
      > > matter --- meeting or not it would be open.
      > >
      > > cindy v
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      > > From:
      > > pmbsola@
      > > Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:14:31
      > > -0500
      > > Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Re: Fw: boe email
      communication -
      > > legislation
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Now I am worried. Do you think the board
      > > members want the emails deleted?
      > > Peter Sola
      > >
      > > -----
      > > Original Message -----
      > > From:
      > > cynthia vaillancourt
      > >
      > > To:
      > > howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > > Sent:
      > > Monday, December 22, 2008 3:19 PM
      > > Subject:
      > > RE: [howardpubliced] Re: Fw: boe email communication -
      legislation
      > >
      > >
      > > This sounds more like a system of choice than a
      > > technological limitation. Hard drive back ups - etc --- it's
      all a
      > > matter of priorities and intent.
      > >
      > > cindy v
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      > > From:
      > > colleendolphin@
      > > Date:
      > > Mon, 22 Dec 2008 16:10:19 +0000
      > > Subject: [howardpubliced] Re: Fw: boe
      > > email communication - legislation
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > I actually believe that they system (CLC) takes
      > > some kind of "snapshot" once a day and
      > > keeps it for one month. So,
      > > if someone sued, and had a subpoena, they could look back
      > > one month
      > > but, I don't believe it is an easy process. I learned this
      when I wanted
      > > emails
      > > through a FOIA request on something and couldn't obtain them.
      > >
      > > Colleen
      > >
      > > --- In howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com,
      > > "The Sola's" <pmbsola@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > I wonder if
      > > that ought to be stopped three days seems way to short,
      especially if
      > > some
      > > one sued the school board. A paper trail helps the board
      > > members. What are the lawyers
      > > opinions?
      > > > Peter Sola
      > > >
      > > -----
      > > >
      > > > From: colleendolphin
      > > > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > > > Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 10:36 PM
      > > > Subject:
      > > [howardpubliced] Re: Fw: boe email communication - legislation
      > > >
      > >
      > > >
      > > > The problem that may exist is that the current CLC
      > > system that is used has no back up.
      > > > Meaning that once an email
      > > is sent and deleted, it only stays on back up for 72 hours.
      > > >
      > > Therefore, anything that is emailed between BOE members and
      deleted is
      > > gone forever
      > > > after 3 days.
      > > > Colleen Morris
      > > >
      > >
      > > > > The boe sends emails to each other?? I guess that is ok,
      > > however, how many
      > > individuals
      > > > emailing to each other
      > > constitute a "board meeting"?
      > > > > Peter Sola
      > > > > -----
      > > Original Message -----
      > > > > From: Allen Dyer
      > > > > To:
      > > howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > > > > Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 4:18 PM
      > > > >
      > > Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Fw: boe email communication -
      > > legislation
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > cassie,
      > > > >
      > > > > those matters that are currently
      > > dealt with behind closed doors would continue to be
      > > > > dealt
      > > with behind closed doors. matters conducted via public emails
      would, of
      > >
      > > > necessity,
      > > > > be limited to those matters that are
      > > currently conducted in open meetings.
      > > > >
      > > > > of
      > > course, it should be possible to go into greater depth in the
      > > discussions of the
      > > > merits
      > > > > of particular
      > > proposals.
      > > > >
      > > > > my proposal basically brings the
      > > conduct of boe business into alignment with the
      > > way
      > > > > the
      > > hcpss staff currently conducts business - a blend of email
      and
      > > face-to-face
      > > > meetings.
      > > > >
      > > > > allen
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > > > From:
      > > Cassie Kilroy Thompson
      > > > > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > > > > Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 3:00 PM
      > > > >
      > > Subject: Re: [howardpubliced] Fw: boe email communication -
      > > legislation
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > While I agree that
      > > there is a NET benefit, I was trying to see if we could play
      devil's
      > >
      > > > advocate to see any possible negative outcome.
      > > > >
      > >
      > > > > --
      > > > > Cassie
      > > > >
      > > -----------------
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > > On Dec 21, 2008, at 2:38 PM, The Sola's
      > > wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Any time the public has
      > > better access to public business we all benefit.
      > > > > Peter
      > > Sola
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Life on your PC is safer, easier, and more enjoyable with
      Windows
      > > Vista®. See
      > > how
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Send e-mail faster without improving your typing skills. Get
      your Hotmail® account.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > __________________________________________________________
      > > It's the same Hotmail®. If by "same" you mean up to 70%
      faster.
      > > http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?
      > ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_broad1_122008
      > >
      >
    • joanpontius
      to me it, sounds like a plan cooked up the the automobile and fuel industry. cars are already backed up onto the road because of parents dropping kids off at
      Message 36 of 36 , Jan 3, 2009
        to me it, sounds like a plan cooked up the the automobile
        and fuel industry.

        cars are already backed up onto the road
        because of parents dropping kids off at school.
        If anything, i would suggest
        we REQUIRE kids to take buses to school, or walk or bike,
        and not allow them or their parents to drive.

        Any additional bus costs would be
        passed on to the parents in the form of
        savings of their car and fuel bills, as well as reduced
        traffic for the rest of us.





        --- In howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com, cynthia vaillancourt
        <CynthiaVaillancourt@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > This sounds like a terrific plan for a charter school or a private
        school - however, I would object strenuously to such a program being
        forced on citizens by the government... remember, school is required
        by the government.
        >
        > Cindy V
        >
        >
        > To: howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com
        > From: normagene@...
        > Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 08:54:59 -0500
        > Subject: [howardpubliced] Re: Fw: boe email communication - legislation
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Even with the county reallocating the school bus fund
        > taxes, the expense would be much greater.
        >
        > First instead of part time employees who are employed a
        > few hours a day, driving the school runs.
        >
        > There would be full time employees who would be employed
        > early enough for the earliest of commuters.
        >
        > And late enough for the latest of commuters.
        >
        > Additionally, I do not see the citizens of Columbia riding to work in
        > yellow busses.
        >
        > Something more upscale, air-conditioned and handicapped
        > equipped would be neededJ
        >
        > And charging for tickets would only cover some of the
        > additional cost.
        >
        >
        >
        > Now do not attack me all at onceJ
        >
        > But I think it is time for our school system to enter the
        > 21st century and put 19th century solutions in their
        > final resting place.
        >
        > Our school day and bus system date back to the
        > 1940's and were designed to meet the needs of a farming community.
        >
        > Or at least a community were there was only one family
        > car.
        >
        >
        >
        > I propose we do away with all bus transportation and
        > reallocate the funds to a longer school day.
        >
        > Parents would transport children to school in their own
        > cars and pay out of pocket for before care from 7am to 8am.
        >
        > Students who's parents/guardians could not afford to
        > transport their students to school would receive a transport voucher
        > after an extensive financial aid application is filled outJ
        >
        > The transport voucher could be used for a taxi service,
        > private bus service or paid to another school parent ($) to provide
        > transportation.
        >
        >
        >
        > The school day would start at 8am and run until 5pm.
        >
        > During the school day there would be 2-3 study halls were
        > ALL homework would be done under the supervision of teachers and older
        > volunteer students who would gain both service time and an hourly
        stipend for
        > use in the cafeteria and school store.
        >
        > There would be no playground time.
        >
        > Instead Art, Music, PE, a Great Books reading hour,
        > outside lecturers for real learning assemblies and other wonderful
        > activities would be added to round out the day.
        >
        > Physical activity would be centered in PE, were the rules
        > to games and sports were learned and practiced, along with a half
        hour of Calisthenics
        > were students would continue to work improving their personal best and
        > Dance/Social Graces instruction would provide exercise and movement.
        So there
        > would be 3 applied physical activity breaks each day.
        >
        > Parents would also pay for aftercare running from 5pm to
        > approx 6pm.
        >
        > Before care and after care would be time for students to
        > read, watch educational movies only, provide tutor services (service
        time and
        > stipend), prepare for Math Olympiad, participate in school Play
        > rehearsals or after school sports, etc.
        >
        > Students would have ZERO take home work. Time in the
        > evenings would be spent with their families.
        >
        > High school students would be given long term or
        > Interactive Seminar reports to write which would require time on
        weekends.
        >
        >
        >
        > And yes, teachers would have longer hours. Salaries would
        > need to be adjusted.
        >
        > But part time adults could cover some of these activities
        > allowing teachers the time during the day to grade, prepare and plan.
        >
        > They too would have ZERO take home work.
        >
        >
        >
        > My two centsJ
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > `yes i would. especially if it meant less traffic and
        > parking lots.
        >
        > `but in this case it wouldn't be raised so much, but would rather
        >
        > `mean just re-categorizing a school expense as a county expense
        >
        > `to allow wider access to the service.
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In howardpubliced@yahoogroups.com,
        > "The Sola's" <pmbsola@> wrote:
        >
        > >
        >
        > > Yes I do. Are you willing to have your taxes raised to pay for
        >
        > public transportation?
        >
        > > I am. But not too much :)
        >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > _________________________________________________________________
        > Life on your PC is safer, easier, and more enjoyable with Windows
        Vista®.
        > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/127032870/direct/01/
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.