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.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
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.
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Taking the toys and going home...
Since Debi Shimmin was elected to the school board, she's apparently gained additional informational resources or new insights into district operations and problems. Shimmin ran for office as a District Office/ Sprenger favorite daughter, but apparently now that she's been elected, she's working to think for herself. This ticks off some Robinson-supporters and/or Robinson suck-ups who now are throwing a big-time temper tantrum and organizing a recall.
This remind me of the "mob" getting someone elected, and then rubbing out that person because the elected official began to believe they actually should do what's best for the community vs. the special-interest bidding of the "mob."
CARES, the group behind this recall, apparently just cares about getting it's own way. Another sad day for the Lebanon Community School District.
This remind me of the "mob" getting someone elected, and then rubbing out that person because the elected official began to believe they actually should do what's best for the community vs. the special-interest bidding of the "mob."
CARES, the group behind this recall, apparently just cares about getting it's own way. Another sad day for the Lebanon Community School District.
Sunday, May 25, 2008
"Lebanon-Express" aims to please...
"...It's not just advertisers. Tick off your sources, and they stop talking. It's exacerbated in a small town, as there are a very limited number of sources," per Dennis Dugan in a comment on this blog.
So we need to realize, when we read the Express, that reporters won't ask tough questions of regular "sources" because that might make them mad, and then they will refuse to talk to the reporters in the future.
This is a cop out: The sources need the paper as much as the paper needs them. I say, "Go ahead! Piss them off!" Then if they refuse to comment for future stories, just write that they refused to comment! They would look petty and manipulative, as some of them no-doubt are!
How would they look if these were actual (they are not) quotes in Express stories"
"Jim Robinson refused to comment when asked about proposed school district budget changes."
"Steve Kelley refused to comment when asked about the high school lockdown last week."
"District Office administrator Ticked-off Tommy refused to comment on reports he was angry after the last board meeting."
"Polly put-off declined to talk to an Express reporter, saying she was mad about last week's story on the school district."
These power-brokers in Lebanon NEED the Express as much as the Express needs them. This may also be true of advertisers, now that I think of it.
So the bottom line here is: Read The Express with 5 grains of salt -- Know that reporters and the editor are most likely careful to print stories that favor the current power brokers. The stories are not likely to be objective, thoughtful accounts of events or issues facing this community.
So we need to realize, when we read the Express, that reporters won't ask tough questions of regular "sources" because that might make them mad, and then they will refuse to talk to the reporters in the future.
This is a cop out: The sources need the paper as much as the paper needs them. I say, "Go ahead! Piss them off!" Then if they refuse to comment for future stories, just write that they refused to comment! They would look petty and manipulative, as some of them no-doubt are!
How would they look if these were actual (they are not) quotes in Express stories"
"Jim Robinson refused to comment when asked about proposed school district budget changes."
"Steve Kelley refused to comment when asked about the high school lockdown last week."
"District Office administrator Ticked-off Tommy refused to comment on reports he was angry after the last board meeting."
"Polly put-off declined to talk to an Express reporter, saying she was mad about last week's story on the school district."
These power-brokers in Lebanon NEED the Express as much as the Express needs them. This may also be true of advertisers, now that I think of it.
So the bottom line here is: Read The Express with 5 grains of salt -- Know that reporters and the editor are most likely careful to print stories that favor the current power brokers. The stories are not likely to be objective, thoughtful accounts of events or issues facing this community.
Some clarifications...
Shimmin's email -- I stand corrected by Dennis as I missed the sentence in Coonrod's story about his obtaining the e-mail through a public records request. And if it's true, as reported by LT, that Sherry forwarded the e-mail to Kelley, when the email concerned a complaint about Kelley from one board to another, then Sherry's action was despicable.
If a colleague or friend sent you an e-mail complaining about a person who is supposed to answer to your authority, would you forward it on to that person without the consent of the sender? This is divisive and something that just does not happen among mature adults. It might happen if an employee complained to their boss about another employee, though even then it wouldn't be great policy. Is that how Sherrie sees herself as board chair? The boss of other board members? This shows a serious lack of judgment by Sherrie, in my opinion.
How many LHS administrators-- I personally support having at least three administrators at the high school. My point was that it was a controversial issue, and DO staff knew that but disrespected the community and board members by not seeking board approval before starting the hiring process.
And yes, the hiring process was not hidden and board members could have initiated an objection. But relationships are so poor between the DO staff and the majority of our school board, that this was unlikely to happen.
Again, nothing will change until the disrespectors (Robinson and Kelley, and there may be others there as well) leave this district.
Board's role-- I agree that the role of a school board is not to micro-manage district operations. When a board can hire a superintendent who listens and does not disrespect board members or the community, the board needs to back away and let this superintendent run the district according to board-approved policies. But at this point, the majority of board members don't appear to trust that the DO staff has the best interest of this community at heart.
Rubber-stamping hiring decisions -- Interesting point, Dennis, that board members ARE supposed to rubber-stamp hiring decisions by the superintendent. I am wondering, if this is the case, why it's legally require that school boards approve hirings? If the role is simply to rubber-stamp, it would seem the board would not be involved in the process at all.
Since it is apparently the role of the board to vote on hiring decisions, it certainly is implied that there is an over-seeing role for the process and candidates selected. If not, why would the board be required to approve all hirings?
Bullying Debi -- I never expected Debi ever to vote against DO positions, so I have been impressed she appears to make up her own mind. I don't see her as among the rubber-stampers when she does agree with a district position, but when she changes her mind radically between board meetings, I do think it's likely she was bullied into changing her mind by the Robinson supporters.
Lebanon-Express -- I think Larry Coonrod does some of the best reporting I've seem in the Express, and often writes a more balanced story than appears in the D-H. Overall, in the many years I've lived here, the Lebanon paper has seemed to be a mouthpiece for power people in the community, whoever they are at the time. In other words: Muckrackers they aren't. But it may need to be that way for their survival...you tick off your advertisers and you might be out of business. So boosterism may be a sad reality for any small local newspaper.
If a colleague or friend sent you an e-mail complaining about a person who is supposed to answer to your authority, would you forward it on to that person without the consent of the sender? This is divisive and something that just does not happen among mature adults. It might happen if an employee complained to their boss about another employee, though even then it wouldn't be great policy. Is that how Sherrie sees herself as board chair? The boss of other board members? This shows a serious lack of judgment by Sherrie, in my opinion.
How many LHS administrators-- I personally support having at least three administrators at the high school. My point was that it was a controversial issue, and DO staff knew that but disrespected the community and board members by not seeking board approval before starting the hiring process.
And yes, the hiring process was not hidden and board members could have initiated an objection. But relationships are so poor between the DO staff and the majority of our school board, that this was unlikely to happen.
Again, nothing will change until the disrespectors (Robinson and Kelley, and there may be others there as well) leave this district.
Board's role-- I agree that the role of a school board is not to micro-manage district operations. When a board can hire a superintendent who listens and does not disrespect board members or the community, the board needs to back away and let this superintendent run the district according to board-approved policies. But at this point, the majority of board members don't appear to trust that the DO staff has the best interest of this community at heart.
Rubber-stamping hiring decisions -- Interesting point, Dennis, that board members ARE supposed to rubber-stamp hiring decisions by the superintendent. I am wondering, if this is the case, why it's legally require that school boards approve hirings? If the role is simply to rubber-stamp, it would seem the board would not be involved in the process at all.
Since it is apparently the role of the board to vote on hiring decisions, it certainly is implied that there is an over-seeing role for the process and candidates selected. If not, why would the board be required to approve all hirings?
Bullying Debi -- I never expected Debi ever to vote against DO positions, so I have been impressed she appears to make up her own mind. I don't see her as among the rubber-stampers when she does agree with a district position, but when she changes her mind radically between board meetings, I do think it's likely she was bullied into changing her mind by the Robinson supporters.
Lebanon-Express -- I think Larry Coonrod does some of the best reporting I've seem in the Express, and often writes a more balanced story than appears in the D-H. Overall, in the many years I've lived here, the Lebanon paper has seemed to be a mouthpiece for power people in the community, whoever they are at the time. In other words: Muckrackers they aren't. But it may need to be that way for their survival...you tick off your advertisers and you might be out of business. So boosterism may be a sad reality for any small local newspaper.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)