Monday, May 19, 2008

What is "Rubber-Stamping"

Rubber-stamping is trusting that someone you respect is correct, and not examining issues yourself when you are elected as a board member to do just that.

Some Robinson lovers thought they were going to get another rubber stamper when they supported Debi in our most recent school board election, and are now upset that she appears to think for herself.

It seems every time Debi, who seems to be a bright and thoughtful woman though I've never spoken with her personally, deviates from the Robinson view (and she agrees with the Robinson crew often), nasty letters to the editor appear in the local paper because she is not the rubber-stamp some thought they elected.

I would bet money (and I never bet money) she gets hateful phone calls and emails from some folks as well. What a badgering she must deal with whenever she examines the evidence and happens to agree with Josh and Rick! My hat is off to her, though I personally voted for Kathy Benzo in that race.

So Debi is NOT a rubber-stamper. And those who wanted her to be one are having a fit.

7 comments:

Dennis said...

IE,

Please reconcile the following:

1) Voting for a set of contract amendments she claimed to not have read at the time, even though they would impact the budget.

2) Using 'we don't know enough about the budget' as justification for not doing something.

3) 'Thoughtful.'

4) Your words: "Rubber-stamping is... not examining issues yourself when you are elected as a board member to do just that."

5) Debi's stated platform: that she would carefully weigh evidence and listen to all parties involved.

Anonymous said...

You are right Improved Ed., Debi is not a rubber stamper and the Robinson camp IS having a fit. One who keeps writing letters to the editor is unfortunately a neighbor of mine (notice the same Robinson supporters write letters to the paper -just how many Connie Schmidt-the vet, Ken Walling-her husband, Warren Beeson-a Lebanon business man and Joyce Weatherly-an old school board member letters will we have to see put in print?! I know Debi personally and I feel for her, some people in this community can be so unkind. Why anyone would want to volunteer to be a Lebanon school board member and take a lot of abuse?!

IE said...

Dennis --

1) Didn't she read them before the vote, right there are the meeting?
Maybe she thought the amendments made good sense. Is that possible? That she just disagrees with your views on this?

2) I think "we don't know enough about the budget" as a reason to delay locking in a commitment to hire 3 total, vs. say 2 total, or just keeping one high school principal is a justifiable decision: Fiscally responsible.

3) Your point here is??? The one meeting I have attended since Debi joined the board, i found her comments to be 'thoughtful'.

4) We may just disagree what qualifies as "examining the issues." Just because she doesn't do it your way, doesn't mean she doesn't do it.

5) I imagine she, as well as many others, believe she is doing this. I think the problem is that Robinson-lovers relentlessly badger her into changing her mind. Too bad.

Dennis said...

Let's assume Debi read the amendments in the meeting.

So freakin' what?

First, it's not enough time to really consider anything, even if she had ignored everything else going on around her.

Second, she had to know that neither the attorney nor the DO staff had seen them, making the professional and respectful thing to do wait (not to mention the thing that would have been in line with her campaign platform).

Third, there's no way she could have taken into account the potential financial impact to the district (or to PIE, for heaven's sake) during the meeting, which completely guts any claims she could make about waiting on the budget to make decisions.

I'm not saying she's a bad person, or even that she's necessarily a bad board member. But she f***** up on this one, and pretending otherwise is looking increasingly like an absurd exercise in defending the indefensible.

IE said...

"...an absurd exercise in defending the indefensible."


And this his how we get polarized in this community, and in other communities I might add.

I feel the same way about your remarks. If she had quickly voted a way you wanted, I doubt you'd react this way. To quote Monk, "Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think so."

Anonymous said...

The board's action on PIE is inexcusable. This can't be dismissed as a mere difference of opinion because the process was hijacked. If the process was allowed to play out, and we arrived at the same result, then you could make that argument and I would agree to disagree. It just doesn't pass the red-face test, and trying to claim it does undermines those of us who are trying to draw attention to the district's real problems.

I think that our community is in desperate need of a new superintendent. I really believed that the current board was a necessary evil to accomplish that, and once done, the community could elect new board members. Actions like this however, and the defense of those actions, make me feel like that may no longer be possible.

Anonymous said...

Voting quickly "the way" dennis wanted would have been the only right way to vote at the time.

With such complicated, financially troubling amendments introduced last minute (and there's no chance in heck she could have read those right there and known what the financial implications could be), a no vote, (aka a wait and see vote) is the ONLY way a rational, person not operating as part of a plot could have voted AT THE TIME.

LATER, she could have voted yes and then, IE, you would have a viable argument.