Your coma: Unplug, or keep on pluggin’? : Unplug if three medical experts think I won't come out of it at least half mentally-home. Otherwise, wait and see..
Superstition you can’t shake: Knock on wood.
Last person you yelled at: My youngest kid.
Duty at work you hate: Anything involving paper.
Invention the world would be better off without: Bombs
Actor/actress you’d trade your partner for: None. We've been together a long time. I mean who really wants to LIVE with a movie star?
Selling price for your kids: Depends on the day, but generally, they aren't for sale.
One thing your mom would faint if she knew about: Too many to list.
Sound of the little voice in your head: Sometimes nagging, sometime cheerleading, sometimes critical, sometimes satisfied.
What you do when the Jehovah’s Witnesses knock: Aggressively ask if they can read the 'No Trespassing' signs, and shut the door!
Web sites you visit instead of working: Yahoo! news, email group lists, LT and RW, sometime the DH
Tylenol or Ibuprofen? : Ibuprofen
Oldest thing in your fridge: I can only name one?
First thing you’d do if made dictator for life: Dictator of the world? the country? ummm. Ban waring weapons would be first, but I gotta long list of things I'd do.
Burial or cremation?: Burial without embalming or concrete, so I can fertilize a tree.
Worst vacation ever: The one where the vehicle repeatedly died -- stranding us in barren, hot, distant places where people weren't friendly or helpful.
Speed you’d drive if you knew you wouldn’t be ticketed: It all depends on mood and situation, but not over 80. Sometimes 40.
Best hangover cure: Time passing.
Sex on the first date? : Absolutely not.
Thing you say that makes you sound like your folks when you swore you never would: To my kids: "Because I said so!"
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Monday, June 23, 2008
A spinoff on the question of students addressing teachers by first names
If teachers and administrators introduced themselves to parents using their first and last name (vs. Mr. Jones or Mrs. Smith or Ms. Green) would parents feel they were seen more as equal adult partners in the business of educating their children?
This thought was sparked by a recent discussion on the other educational blogs, around teachers allowing students to call them by first names, or by their last name alone..like "Head," as last year's band teacher, Josh Head, was often called by his students.
There are pros and cons to the issue around students using first names to address teachers, but I generally figure it's up to the individual teacher. I will add that teachers I see my children respecting are teachers who are confident, competent, and caring: There does not seem to be a correlation between what the teacher is called and the level or type of respect my students report for the teacher.
But when I think about my own interactions with teachers and administrators, there is a correlation between those I have found easiest and most satisfying to work with as a parent, and those who suggest I call them by their first name.
Now we know that correlation does not equal causation, so it may be there are other factors that account for my feeling heard and respected by these folks. But it's one small change for some teachers/administrators that might lead to positive interactions with some of us parents. At least it might be worth a try.
This thought was sparked by a recent discussion on the other educational blogs, around teachers allowing students to call them by first names, or by their last name alone..like "Head," as last year's band teacher, Josh Head, was often called by his students.
There are pros and cons to the issue around students using first names to address teachers, but I generally figure it's up to the individual teacher. I will add that teachers I see my children respecting are teachers who are confident, competent, and caring: There does not seem to be a correlation between what the teacher is called and the level or type of respect my students report for the teacher.
But when I think about my own interactions with teachers and administrators, there is a correlation between those I have found easiest and most satisfying to work with as a parent, and those who suggest I call them by their first name.
Now we know that correlation does not equal causation, so it may be there are other factors that account for my feeling heard and respected by these folks. But it's one small change for some teachers/administrators that might lead to positive interactions with some of us parents. At least it might be worth a try.
Don't micromanage, but do manage
On the RW blog there is a simple, elegant anonymous comment by a reader that just hits the mark:
"If Mr. Robinson is completely opposed to working with the board, that is impractical and he may need to go. Yes, the board should not micromanage, but they are expected to manage. I have a good boss, who lets me work, but when he disagrees with me, he wins."
That is so well-stated that I wanted to feature it here.
"If Mr. Robinson is completely opposed to working with the board, that is impractical and he may need to go. Yes, the board should not micromanage, but they are expected to manage. I have a good boss, who lets me work, but when he disagrees with me, he wins."
That is so well-stated that I wanted to feature it here.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
A good firework but ends with fizzle
Hasso had another editorial in last night's DH about the latest LCSD board-member recall effort. It notes a real problem with the recall, but fizzles in conclusion. Here's the editorial:
Here's another version:
Some district residents get mad because they worked for Shimmin's election thinking she was a Sprenger clone (a.k.a. Will Do Robinson's Bidding). But it turns out she thinks for herself.
So they tantrum, label her a rule-breaker and decide with righteous indignation to recall her because she's been a very bad girl (doesn't behave as they want). Then they discover some people really blame Rick and Josh (the two bad boys) for recent board actions, and want them recalled more than Debi -- so they decide to go for all three. And then they find many people feel Debi's doing a good job (or "good enough" job) and won't sign her recall petition, but would sign to recall Rick and Josh: Maybe some of them think the bad boys corrupted this good girl.
So then someone in the group decided they would see if they can talk some sense into Debi -- to get her to mend her ways. (Never mind that one would think they might have talked with her before filing a recall petition.) So the head of this self-appointed elders' council meets with Shimmin, who either convinces them she really is a good girl, or that she's seen the error of her ways and won't displease them again, or that she really has good reasons for voting as she does.
We don't know what she told them that prompted them to drop her from their recall: The elders either decide they made a huge mistake by calling for Debi's head, or they feel she is now intimidated and won't disappoint them again, or have some other reason they decide to drop the recall. No one is talking about the content of the conversation between the elders and Debi, so we are left to speculate.
I give Debi the benefit of the doubt here, but something smells of rotten fish. Hasso is right when he says this recall seems "a little too calculating and manipulative." And yes, Lebanon really does not need the extra lemon in the soup this ever-changing recall process adds. But beyond that, we need to take a look at CARES. It seems to be a special-interest group of self-appointed local power people who want to maintain the current administration and it's focus.
If CARES doesn't change it's mind again and call off the recall effort completely, I guess we will see if they are able to gather enough signatures to force a vote on recalling Josh and Rick. And if there is an election, we will see if the majority of those who vote favor ousting these two board members who have had the courage to challenge Robinson's Regime and be mavericks for positive change.
But CARES could do us all a favor by recalling itself as the self-annointed judge of what's good for education in Lebanon.
Recall maneuvers
The maneuvering about the on- and off- and on-again recalls against various members of the Lebanon School Board sound a little too calculating and manipulative.
First the recall petitioners gave public notice of wanting to recall board member Debi Shimmin because her term had longer to run than two other members that the recall backers also want off the board. Then Sherrie Sprenger, the board chair, announced she would step down July 1 in order to pursue her election campaign for the legislature. That would give the recall targets a chance to appoint an ally of theirs in her place, giving them three or even four votes on the five-member board. So then the recallers filed against their main targets, Rick Alexander and Josh Wineteer as well as Shimmin. A few days later, they announced they had met with Shimmin and would no longer proceed with the petition against her. The five complaints against her in the recall petition were suddenly no longer all that grievous.
All that makes you wonder whether the long-suffering Lebanon school system would not be better off without the added acrimony of a recall campaign. (hh)
Here's another version:
Some district residents get mad because they worked for Shimmin's election thinking she was a Sprenger clone (a.k.a. Will Do Robinson's Bidding). But it turns out she thinks for herself.
So they tantrum, label her a rule-breaker and decide with righteous indignation to recall her because she's been a very bad girl (doesn't behave as they want). Then they discover some people really blame Rick and Josh (the two bad boys) for recent board actions, and want them recalled more than Debi -- so they decide to go for all three. And then they find many people feel Debi's doing a good job (or "good enough" job) and won't sign her recall petition, but would sign to recall Rick and Josh: Maybe some of them think the bad boys corrupted this good girl.
So then someone in the group decided they would see if they can talk some sense into Debi -- to get her to mend her ways. (Never mind that one would think they might have talked with her before filing a recall petition.) So the head of this self-appointed elders' council meets with Shimmin, who either convinces them she really is a good girl, or that she's seen the error of her ways and won't displease them again, or that she really has good reasons for voting as she does.
We don't know what she told them that prompted them to drop her from their recall: The elders either decide they made a huge mistake by calling for Debi's head, or they feel she is now intimidated and won't disappoint them again, or have some other reason they decide to drop the recall. No one is talking about the content of the conversation between the elders and Debi, so we are left to speculate.
I give Debi the benefit of the doubt here, but something smells of rotten fish. Hasso is right when he says this recall seems "a little too calculating and manipulative." And yes, Lebanon really does not need the extra lemon in the soup this ever-changing recall process adds. But beyond that, we need to take a look at CARES. It seems to be a special-interest group of self-appointed local power people who want to maintain the current administration and it's focus.
If CARES doesn't change it's mind again and call off the recall effort completely, I guess we will see if they are able to gather enough signatures to force a vote on recalling Josh and Rick. And if there is an election, we will see if the majority of those who vote favor ousting these two board members who have had the courage to challenge Robinson's Regime and be mavericks for positive change.
But CARES could do us all a favor by recalling itself as the self-annointed judge of what's good for education in Lebanon.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Thank you Moody and Hasso!
Today's D-H has a balanced and well-written feature story by Jennifer Moody about Kim Fandino leaving her position as local president of OEA, as well as a thoughtful and well-written Hasso Hering editorial about the current attempt to recall the three board members who dare to disagree with Superintendent Robinson.
Thank you both: Reading each provided a welcome, refreshing breath of fresh air.
Thank you both: Reading each provided a welcome, refreshing breath of fresh air.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Won't print hate
Just want to say that I won't be printing any hateful or even negative responses to Kim Fandino's comments just published on this blog. Her comments are meant to stand as written. She does not deserve any more hate and negativity coming her way. So if you read her comments and are planning to fire off a negative comment to be posted on this blog, save yourself time and energy by not bothering, as such comments will not be posted here.
Ms. Fandino...I salute you!
Kim Fandino resigned as president of the LCSD teacher's union last night. I can't blame her. What follows is a copy of her resignation remarks read at last night's school board meeting. Her remarks are so well-stated and thoughtful that I wanted to print them as she wrote them: Enough said.
"Members of the Board, district administration, faculty, staff, and members of the community,
It is with mixed emotions that I come before you with my final statement as the official spokesperson for the Lebanon Education Association. There were apparently questions as to the reality of my resignation because I
said that I was stepping down before.. . I want to set the record straight. I have twice in the past wanted to
step down... the first when I was expecting my son (who is now six) and the second during the last election
cycle a year ago. Because of the contentious and volatile relationship with the superintendent, few people are
willing to put themselves in the line of fire that goes with Association leadership in this district. The first time I
tried to step down, no one was willing to run and so I agreed to continue on. The second time, we had a
candidate who was ready and excited about the prospect, but unfortunately, between nominations and the
election he was forced to resign from the district and move home to be with his family after multiple deaths and
illnesses in his family. What makes this time different, is that the resolution of the ULP and the lack of major
grievances or bargaining makes right now a fairly safe time for others to get their feet wet and learn the ropes.
Leadership must change from time to time in order for organizations to continue to grow and improve upon
themselves. I am proud of my colleagues and it has been an honor serving them.
As the representative of your certified employees, I have spoken for the Association on many issues before this
board. However, I have never put all of our concerns into one statement. It actually would be impossible to do
so because the number of issues and nature of concerns that have come across my desk, email, voicemail etc.
would be impossible to quantify If I were to be paid at the going rate for counseling services, legal advice,
financial advising etc., that I have had opportunity to provide to my members, I probably could have retired by
now.
During my tenure, there has been significant change and upheaval. The district has transitioned from a fairly
stable and reasonable place of employment into a chaotic quagmire of distrust and intimidation tactics.
I have been in a position that has dealt with district-level leadership issues for longer than anyone else here. I
bargained with Superintendent Hazen over a decade ago, and although a few building administrators have been
in the district longer than I, they have not been on the front lines of issues district-wide as I have. I have been
placed in a position of having to know the law and contract inside-out because this district administration has
consistently played fast and loose with rules, regulations and policies. Asbestos exposure of students and staff,
illegal bargaining practices, forcing teachers to work more hours than allowed by the contract, discrimination
and harassment, failure to report complaints of sexual harassment, violations of student rights and Special Ed
laws, failure to reimburse faculty in a fair and equitable manner and involuntary transfers based on personality
issues and poor leadership rather than teacher performance are just a few of the issues I have witnessed.
Reedsport teachers and administration explain that they are still, and I quote, "repairing the damage done by Jim
Robinson," more than a decade after he was non-renewed. When we took the vote of No Confidence in2004,
new teachers voted in support of the motion because their welcome speech by Mr Robinson included the
statement that if you were not comfortable with chaos, this is not the district for you.
Mr. Robinson has made statements over the years that have clearly demonstrated his agenda. He views
bargaining as a battle to be won. He views grievances as acts of war. He views teachers as enemies who are not
to be trusted if they disagree with him or advocate for students in opposition to his philosophy.
We have programs and ideologies in play that directly counteract each other.... For example, the Communities
that Care group used to do surveys about the numbers of indicators students had for being at risk. We had a
whole training about what children needed. At the top of the list were a few things relative to relationships A
strong tie to peers was very close to the top. And yet, our student achievement system, yanks students away
from peers based on test scores and our academies direct students away from their support group and they latch
on to the first person they come to, which may or may not be a good thing. Considering the deeply entrenched
cliques that the academies have become, I do not view it as good. I used to think that social promotion wasn't a
good thing until now. The loss of the peer group is weighing on our students.
During the recent budget discussions, the elephant in the room has not been discussed. We are losing students,
yet our community is growing, why is that? As a parent, I have removed my elementary daughter from Lebanon
Schools because I wanted her to be a third grader who will grow with a core group of students from now until
graduation. She is a TAG student, but I have made it clear as a parent that as long as she is loving school and
feels connected, I have no need to place her in a different program just because she is eligible. The social aspect
is much more important. Also, in her new school she has PE twice a week, Music twice a week, art, and drama.
I believe she is being treated as whole child. We are not providing that sort of education in Lebanon.
I have always been a sort of "bloom where you are planted" kind of person that develops deep loyalty to people,
places and circumstances. However, I also believe in fairness and equity and unlike some of my peers, I am not
willing to sit by and watch damage be done without speaking up. When I was little and my father would say,
"Kim, life isn't always fair." My response always was and continues to be, "but it should be."
Life in Lebanon isn't fair for teachers and students. It is not fair for the parents or the community. Programs
have been slashed or eliminated, advanced programming has been decimated and eliminated. Philosophical
perspectives have turned enabling students into a fine art. There are no clear standards for behavior nor
academics. Teachers and staff have for the most part stopped enforcing rules because there is no back-up from
the next level. Brand-new teachers are thrown into the deep end without life preservers and while we spend
hours figuring out what to do about advisory they are struggling to figure out how to get their content across to
the kids in the classes they need to graduate.
Don't get me wrong, there are some very good administrators in some of these buildings who support their
teachers and students and have clear expectations. However, there are some buildings at every level that push
down every teacher concern and mark down teachers who express concerns for not being "team players" or they
are transferred to another building Again, why would anyone speak up if they knew that would be the result?
At that point you are looking at job security
For whatever reason, many of you have been convinced of the lack of importance of the two unions in the
district. Ms. Sprenger has made it clear that my comments are of no difference in weight than those of a general
audience member. However, by legal standing and by election, I have the weight of over 200 employees behind
me. My comments, whether you believe me or not, have always been tempered by the expectations and
requirements of my executive board who represent each and every building. The very small minority of teachers
and other certified staff who have come and spoken before the board in opposition to my statements at times
have that right, but make no mistake, they are a tiny minority of the licensed staff. Also, they have tended to be
people who have benefited from current administration and/or administrative direction who know that they are
on the "side" that won't get blogged or punished in some other format.
Bad things happen when good people do nothing.. . Bad things are happening and good people are doing
nothing. Why is that? It is because of the actions of those who have bought into a philosophy without any real
investigation or discussion as to the logic and efficacy of that philosophy. It is interesting to note that when Mr.
Wineteer and Mr. Alexander were dissenting votes, they were viewed as the minority. When Ms. Shimmin
joined them at times in their actions and Ms. Sprenger and Mr. Fisher found themselves in the minority, the
majority was labeled as illegal, immoral and unethical, they were blogged, insulted, slandered and libeled and it
was all sanctioned by the minority and a few of their supporters.
Why would any logical person who wants to keep their job and wants to have a peaceful life put themselves in a
position of having themselves attacked, reprimanded, blogged or having a letter put in their file? No one wants
to be treated like Kim Fandino, Bo Yates, Ed Sansom, or Debbie Shimmin. The attackers (anonymous and
known) violate Board policy and even law in their attempts to discredit and hurt anyone who disagrees with
them.
Those of you who are at this very moment plotting your next blog or letter to the editor in response to my
comments have in the vast majority of cases never come and spoken to me or any of the people on "my side" of
the issue about our positions or perspectives. You have been and continue to be one-sided, close-minded, single
note opponents to the very people who you need to implement any programs or activities you may want in the
future.
What needs to change?
This district needs a positive leader who is trusted by all sides.
We need building administrators who have experience with effective strategies, not just philosophical
ideologies that mesh with Mr. Robinson's.
We need faculty and staff that feel respected and trusted in their positions.
We need time and facilitation to align the curriculum vertically and horizontally.
We need a blog-free, intimidation-free, harassment-free work place.
I have one final official request as the president...
We know that the bargaining that is coming up will be difficult due to budget constraints; however, it does not
need to be difficult due to philosophies nor demonstrations of the depths of one's power or position. We are
prepared to bargain in good faith and look at common solutions and ideas to get to a win-win outcome.
Unfortunately, we do not believe that Mr. Robinson's stated philosophy on bargaining has been productive or
appropriate in the past. He has repeatedly refused to allow us to use a truly collaborative model for resolution
and as I stated before, views bargaining as a game to win For us, it is not a game. It is our lives and our
livelihood. We do not believe that good faith bargaining is possible under the current circumstances, unless we
can do it collaboratively and without the input of Mr. Robinson. This is not unprecedented, Mr. Robinson has
removed himself from the bargaining before.
We therefore would ask the board to consider the following.
We bargain in January of 2010.
We would like to utilize the collaborative method of bargaining.
We would like to have two board members involved in the process and at least one board member present for
every session.
We would like to request that Mr. Robinson not be involved in the bargaining on behalf of the district.
While this may all seem like a negative diatribe. I felt compelled by honesty and decency to let you know what
the elephants in the room are, and will continue to be, if things don't change. This community is in danger
because the heart is being destroyed piece by piece. The educated adults in the community are increasingly
sending their students to other schools. The behavior in the schools is escalating and in some cases we have
classes that look like they should be in an inner-city school.
However, even with all that, I love this district, I love these kids. ... If I didn't, I wouldn't even speak up
because I just wouldn't care.
I am not afraid, but many others are...you will not hear from Kim Fandino's mouth on these kinds of issues in
the future, but you will hear from me... in the voice of my president! Make no mistake, my president speaks for
me and for about 90% of the rest of the teachers. Take that person seriously, no matter who is in the position,
they are representing all of us. If you doubt that, please feel free to survey all of your employees in a
confidential, unfiltered manner, and you will get fair representation of perspectives.
I appreciate the opportunity to address you."
"Members of the Board, district administration, faculty, staff, and members of the community,
It is with mixed emotions that I come before you with my final statement as the official spokesperson for the Lebanon Education Association. There were apparently questions as to the reality of my resignation because I
said that I was stepping down before.. . I want to set the record straight. I have twice in the past wanted to
step down... the first when I was expecting my son (who is now six) and the second during the last election
cycle a year ago. Because of the contentious and volatile relationship with the superintendent, few people are
willing to put themselves in the line of fire that goes with Association leadership in this district. The first time I
tried to step down, no one was willing to run and so I agreed to continue on. The second time, we had a
candidate who was ready and excited about the prospect, but unfortunately, between nominations and the
election he was forced to resign from the district and move home to be with his family after multiple deaths and
illnesses in his family. What makes this time different, is that the resolution of the ULP and the lack of major
grievances or bargaining makes right now a fairly safe time for others to get their feet wet and learn the ropes.
Leadership must change from time to time in order for organizations to continue to grow and improve upon
themselves. I am proud of my colleagues and it has been an honor serving them.
As the representative of your certified employees, I have spoken for the Association on many issues before this
board. However, I have never put all of our concerns into one statement. It actually would be impossible to do
so because the number of issues and nature of concerns that have come across my desk, email, voicemail etc.
would be impossible to quantify If I were to be paid at the going rate for counseling services, legal advice,
financial advising etc., that I have had opportunity to provide to my members, I probably could have retired by
now.
During my tenure, there has been significant change and upheaval. The district has transitioned from a fairly
stable and reasonable place of employment into a chaotic quagmire of distrust and intimidation tactics.
I have been in a position that has dealt with district-level leadership issues for longer than anyone else here. I
bargained with Superintendent Hazen over a decade ago, and although a few building administrators have been
in the district longer than I, they have not been on the front lines of issues district-wide as I have. I have been
placed in a position of having to know the law and contract inside-out because this district administration has
consistently played fast and loose with rules, regulations and policies. Asbestos exposure of students and staff,
illegal bargaining practices, forcing teachers to work more hours than allowed by the contract, discrimination
and harassment, failure to report complaints of sexual harassment, violations of student rights and Special Ed
laws, failure to reimburse faculty in a fair and equitable manner and involuntary transfers based on personality
issues and poor leadership rather than teacher performance are just a few of the issues I have witnessed.
Reedsport teachers and administration explain that they are still, and I quote, "repairing the damage done by Jim
Robinson," more than a decade after he was non-renewed. When we took the vote of No Confidence in2004,
new teachers voted in support of the motion because their welcome speech by Mr Robinson included the
statement that if you were not comfortable with chaos, this is not the district for you.
Mr. Robinson has made statements over the years that have clearly demonstrated his agenda. He views
bargaining as a battle to be won. He views grievances as acts of war. He views teachers as enemies who are not
to be trusted if they disagree with him or advocate for students in opposition to his philosophy.
We have programs and ideologies in play that directly counteract each other.... For example, the Communities
that Care group used to do surveys about the numbers of indicators students had for being at risk. We had a
whole training about what children needed. At the top of the list were a few things relative to relationships A
strong tie to peers was very close to the top. And yet, our student achievement system, yanks students away
from peers based on test scores and our academies direct students away from their support group and they latch
on to the first person they come to, which may or may not be a good thing. Considering the deeply entrenched
cliques that the academies have become, I do not view it as good. I used to think that social promotion wasn't a
good thing until now. The loss of the peer group is weighing on our students.
During the recent budget discussions, the elephant in the room has not been discussed. We are losing students,
yet our community is growing, why is that? As a parent, I have removed my elementary daughter from Lebanon
Schools because I wanted her to be a third grader who will grow with a core group of students from now until
graduation. She is a TAG student, but I have made it clear as a parent that as long as she is loving school and
feels connected, I have no need to place her in a different program just because she is eligible. The social aspect
is much more important. Also, in her new school she has PE twice a week, Music twice a week, art, and drama.
I believe she is being treated as whole child. We are not providing that sort of education in Lebanon.
I have always been a sort of "bloom where you are planted" kind of person that develops deep loyalty to people,
places and circumstances. However, I also believe in fairness and equity and unlike some of my peers, I am not
willing to sit by and watch damage be done without speaking up. When I was little and my father would say,
"Kim, life isn't always fair." My response always was and continues to be, "but it should be."
Life in Lebanon isn't fair for teachers and students. It is not fair for the parents or the community. Programs
have been slashed or eliminated, advanced programming has been decimated and eliminated. Philosophical
perspectives have turned enabling students into a fine art. There are no clear standards for behavior nor
academics. Teachers and staff have for the most part stopped enforcing rules because there is no back-up from
the next level. Brand-new teachers are thrown into the deep end without life preservers and while we spend
hours figuring out what to do about advisory they are struggling to figure out how to get their content across to
the kids in the classes they need to graduate.
Don't get me wrong, there are some very good administrators in some of these buildings who support their
teachers and students and have clear expectations. However, there are some buildings at every level that push
down every teacher concern and mark down teachers who express concerns for not being "team players" or they
are transferred to another building Again, why would anyone speak up if they knew that would be the result?
At that point you are looking at job security
For whatever reason, many of you have been convinced of the lack of importance of the two unions in the
district. Ms. Sprenger has made it clear that my comments are of no difference in weight than those of a general
audience member. However, by legal standing and by election, I have the weight of over 200 employees behind
me. My comments, whether you believe me or not, have always been tempered by the expectations and
requirements of my executive board who represent each and every building. The very small minority of teachers
and other certified staff who have come and spoken before the board in opposition to my statements at times
have that right, but make no mistake, they are a tiny minority of the licensed staff. Also, they have tended to be
people who have benefited from current administration and/or administrative direction who know that they are
on the "side" that won't get blogged or punished in some other format.
Bad things happen when good people do nothing.. . Bad things are happening and good people are doing
nothing. Why is that? It is because of the actions of those who have bought into a philosophy without any real
investigation or discussion as to the logic and efficacy of that philosophy. It is interesting to note that when Mr.
Wineteer and Mr. Alexander were dissenting votes, they were viewed as the minority. When Ms. Shimmin
joined them at times in their actions and Ms. Sprenger and Mr. Fisher found themselves in the minority, the
majority was labeled as illegal, immoral and unethical, they were blogged, insulted, slandered and libeled and it
was all sanctioned by the minority and a few of their supporters.
Why would any logical person who wants to keep their job and wants to have a peaceful life put themselves in a
position of having themselves attacked, reprimanded, blogged or having a letter put in their file? No one wants
to be treated like Kim Fandino, Bo Yates, Ed Sansom, or Debbie Shimmin. The attackers (anonymous and
known) violate Board policy and even law in their attempts to discredit and hurt anyone who disagrees with
them.
Those of you who are at this very moment plotting your next blog or letter to the editor in response to my
comments have in the vast majority of cases never come and spoken to me or any of the people on "my side" of
the issue about our positions or perspectives. You have been and continue to be one-sided, close-minded, single
note opponents to the very people who you need to implement any programs or activities you may want in the
future.
What needs to change?
This district needs a positive leader who is trusted by all sides.
We need building administrators who have experience with effective strategies, not just philosophical
ideologies that mesh with Mr. Robinson's.
We need faculty and staff that feel respected and trusted in their positions.
We need time and facilitation to align the curriculum vertically and horizontally.
We need a blog-free, intimidation-free, harassment-free work place.
I have one final official request as the president...
We know that the bargaining that is coming up will be difficult due to budget constraints; however, it does not
need to be difficult due to philosophies nor demonstrations of the depths of one's power or position. We are
prepared to bargain in good faith and look at common solutions and ideas to get to a win-win outcome.
Unfortunately, we do not believe that Mr. Robinson's stated philosophy on bargaining has been productive or
appropriate in the past. He has repeatedly refused to allow us to use a truly collaborative model for resolution
and as I stated before, views bargaining as a game to win For us, it is not a game. It is our lives and our
livelihood. We do not believe that good faith bargaining is possible under the current circumstances, unless we
can do it collaboratively and without the input of Mr. Robinson. This is not unprecedented, Mr. Robinson has
removed himself from the bargaining before.
We therefore would ask the board to consider the following.
We bargain in January of 2010.
We would like to utilize the collaborative method of bargaining.
We would like to have two board members involved in the process and at least one board member present for
every session.
We would like to request that Mr. Robinson not be involved in the bargaining on behalf of the district.
While this may all seem like a negative diatribe. I felt compelled by honesty and decency to let you know what
the elephants in the room are, and will continue to be, if things don't change. This community is in danger
because the heart is being destroyed piece by piece. The educated adults in the community are increasingly
sending their students to other schools. The behavior in the schools is escalating and in some cases we have
classes that look like they should be in an inner-city school.
However, even with all that, I love this district, I love these kids. ... If I didn't, I wouldn't even speak up
because I just wouldn't care.
I am not afraid, but many others are...you will not hear from Kim Fandino's mouth on these kinds of issues in
the future, but you will hear from me... in the voice of my president! Make no mistake, my president speaks for
me and for about 90% of the rest of the teachers. Take that person seriously, no matter who is in the position,
they are representing all of us. If you doubt that, please feel free to survey all of your employees in a
confidential, unfiltered manner, and you will get fair representation of perspectives.
I appreciate the opportunity to address you."
Sunday, June 1, 2008
Legal opinion needed to go poop?
It seems that the Robinson loyalists scream "illegal" any time the board takes a vote that doesn't go their way...suspending Robinson was "illegal" they say, and Josh's amendments to the PIE contract were "illegal."
Yet one never hears that screech when votes support their opinions.
Let's remember that the only decisions that have to date been found "illegal" by a judicial body were those Robinson pushed -- the contracting out of custodial staff and the discipline of Kim Fandino.
It's also interesting that the head of CARES is an attorney employed by Tom McHill, who was one of three board members included in this town's LAST recall effort not so long ago. Bet he's making big points with his boss for all this CARES work.
It seems that if the board does anything against Robinson's wishes, the cry of "illegal" drifts over this community. If they wanted a potty break during a board meeting, and Robinson objected, bet they'd say we need a legal opinion to decide on that...and that taking a break without one was "illegal" (I'm only half kidding.)
Again...which side has the history of being shown "illegal"? Let's stick to the facts.
Yet one never hears that screech when votes support their opinions.
Let's remember that the only decisions that have to date been found "illegal" by a judicial body were those Robinson pushed -- the contracting out of custodial staff and the discipline of Kim Fandino.
It's also interesting that the head of CARES is an attorney employed by Tom McHill, who was one of three board members included in this town's LAST recall effort not so long ago. Bet he's making big points with his boss for all this CARES work.
It seems that if the board does anything against Robinson's wishes, the cry of "illegal" drifts over this community. If they wanted a potty break during a board meeting, and Robinson objected, bet they'd say we need a legal opinion to decide on that...and that taking a break without one was "illegal" (I'm only half kidding.)
Again...which side has the history of being shown "illegal"? Let's stick to the facts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)