From today's News-Gazette:
In other business, the board released a list of 26 community members who will help oversee the district's planning process for its building and program needs for the next 20 to 25 years.
Each board member suggested six to seven people for the "vision" committee, and the board looked at about 50 names and came up with the committee announced Monday. Board members Kristine Chalifoux and Greg Novak, who are in charge of developing the planning process, said a few more names will likely be added. They were unable to confirm the participation of a few suggested committee members.
They said other residents who are interested in participating in the planning will be asked to be part of two working groups that will look at building and program needs.
Vision committee members
CHAMPAIGN – The members of the Champaign school district's vision committee are:
- Doug Abbott, owner of Abbott's Florist and a parent.
- Sam Banks, president of Cunningham Children's Home.
- Imani Bazzell, director of the Center for Civic Engagement and Social Justice at the Urban League of Champaign County, parent and a member of the district's equity committee.
- William Berry, University of Illinois associate chancellor.
- Paul Curtis, owner of Curtis Orchard.
- Barb Daly, assistant superintendent for the Regional Office of Education and a former Champaign principal and teacher.
- Joan Dixon, executive director of the Community Foundation of East Central Illinois.
- Deb Frank Feinen, Champaign City Council member.
- Deb Foertsch, president of the Champaign Federation of Teachers.
- Peter Fox, chairman of Fox Development Corp.
- Tom Grimsey, president of the Champaign Educational Services Personnel.
- Mike Haile, WDWS/WHMS station manager and a parent.
- Richard Helton, Savoy village manager.
- Gina Jackson, Champaign City Council member.
- Bruce Knight, Champaign planning director.
- Happy Leman, pastor of the Vineyard church.
- Dan McCall, president of the East Central Illinois Building Trades Council.
- Dannel McCollum, former Champaign mayor and a former Champaign teacher.
- Brian Minsker, president of the PTA Council.
- Thom Moore, former Champaign school board member and a member of the district's equity committee.
- Tracy Parsons, president and CEO of the Urban League of Champaign County, and a member of the district's equity committee.
- Thomas Ramage, president of Parkland College.
- Gail Rost, executive director of the C-U Schools Foundation.
- Linda Tortorelli, a coordinator in the UI Department of Special Education and a parent.
- Phil Van Ness, former Champaign school board member, attorney and a parent.
- Laura Weis, president of the Champaign County Chamber of Commerce.
Discuss.
Heck of a crew.
Can't have a list like that without Imani Bazzell on it. (*rolls eyes*)
Planning more than a few years out seems like a major waste of effort to me - so much can happen way beyond your control.
How about just a few average citizens with no agenda?
"Can't have a list like that without Imani Bazzell on it. (*rolls eyes*)"
Actually, I'm glad she's on the list. Excluding her means that the Committee had some preconcieved conclusions in mind.
"Planning more than a few years out seems like a major waste of effort to me - so much can happen way beyond your control."
Plans must be adaptable. There's nothing wrong with setting long-range goals, and if circumstances change, adjusting how the District plans to achieve them.
"How about just a few average citizens with no agenda?"
I'm pretty happy with the list, but I think they're still taking suggestions, if you have any.
Can't have a list like that without Imani Bazzell on it. (*rolls eyes*)
After one of my first teacher inservice seminars on diversity, where Ms. Bazzell was kind enough to tell all of the white teachers that we were automatically racist because we can't understand the needs of the african-american student, I'm not exactly a big fan of her either. That inservice is one of the primary reasons our children will not go to Unit 4 schools unless there are some drastic improvments. However, excluding her from the committee would only serve to add fuel to the fire. Here, there will (hopefully) be plenty of others on the committee to tell her when to shut the hell up and stop playing the race card.
I would like to see a bit more general community involvement. A little more of Joe/Jane Parent and less community power players.
My reaction was that the group is way too big to accomplish much. There's no way that many people will actively draft the plan. That means that a small core group will draft it and then everyone else will nitpick it to death. In fact, it's almost as big as another body that doesn't get much done --- the county board :)
Can you say, "Big Small All - Part Two"!?!?
I remember Phil Van Ness making what I thought were some high handed comments about the intelligence of the public who didn't see the need for more taxes on the last attempt to build new schools. He is an ex board member as is Thom Moore and I believe both were on the board that got us into the current mess with the consent decree. All of the people on this committee are so-called "civic leaders." I'll reserve judgment until I see their recommendations, but I'm going to be skeptical. I'm afraid this is just a p.r. attempt to get a big tax increase through.
I see the list as mostly representing special interest groups...especially business special interests. Very weighted toward conservatives and conservative viewpoints. Only a handful of folks with any background in education, or in educational policy-making.
I especially agree with the folks who have posted that this group doesn't include the "average" citizen (parents or teachers would be a good place to start, for example). By not including folks on the grass-roots level, the committee will have a serious legitimacy problems in the long run. Lots of folks with agendas to push, and many of those agendas have nothing to do with educational best practices.
But what about the folks in the trenches...the teachers (not just the union president, who has her own agenda to push) and parents? Although many parents have good things to say about Unit 4, many also have concerns about narrowing of curriculum, feelings of not being welcome in the schools, over-testing, lack of healthy exercise, etc.
The idea of a vision committee is excellent in theory, but in practice, it seems like there is no escape from the special interest groups!! It would be much better to have more of a political and social balance. How to achieve that end, I'm not sure. But letting go of agendas and attempting to truly represent all segments of our community would be a good place to start.
Imani Bazzell and Thom Moore should not be on this committee. They have held this community back for more than 15 years with their semantic agendas.
Some people in this community need to start growing backbones and start excluding this duo. Their inclusion automatically means this group will not reach the best solution possible.
"Very weighted toward conservatives and conservative viewpoints"--Imani is a such a huge conservative (she is doing nothing more then what she thinks is important for children), I have no problem with some plain old citizens on the panel but the people listed represent thousands if not ten's of thousands (Deb) of people. I would think this group would be put together to do a building plan which as before would require a tax increase. I have been involved in these committees before and they have a lot of help and take time. You could always help out.
They might take less time if people without semantic agendas were on them.
What exactly is a "semantic agenda"? Is that kinda like a grammar nazi? Will they attack their fellow committee members with commas and split infinitives?
I would like to see some committee members who represent the growing Latino/a population in the city. Perhaps I'm out of the loop and some of the current members do. I'm not saying that those members would have to necessarily be Latino/a, but have some empathy and understanding of that ethnic community.
I'd say the same about those attacked on this site for bringing up African American racial concerns. There are certainly well-documented problems with empathy gaps between well-intentioned ethnic majority teachers and African American students (including the research that shows that students perform much better with an instructor of their ethnic background). While I would agree that using the language cited earlier in this thread to Imani would be counterproductive--well-meaning ethnic majority teachers need support, not judgment. However, as I was not there, I don't know how it was presented. For example, when I introduced this study without any judgment, just as scientific research, many of the ethnic majority teachers accused me of "playing the race card" despite the fact that I was simply introducing the article I had been assigned for class.
The question I have is whether if you don't like the members of the African American community actively approaching the racial disparity issue, is there someone you think would do a better job? Or do you just not want to see the issue addressed at all?
I imagine the answers will vary greatly among participants of this blog...
Wikipedia has never heard of "semantic agenda" but some guy wrote a book about it:
Xian, I've been on the receiving end of some of Ms Bazell's lectures, and while I'm sure she's sincere in her beliefs, the way that she delivers them is damaging to the message. I agree with the posters above that this group is nothing more than an attempt to silence critics of the previous plans and to sell the public on a referendum. I'll withhold judgment until I see the recommendations, but I hope it isn't more of the same old same old.
"I agree with the posters above that this group is nothing more than an attempt to silence critics of the previous plans and to sell the public on a referendum. I'll withhold judgment until I see the recommendations, but I hope it isn't more of the same old same old."
Your second sentence is a direct contradiction of your first. I'm as cynical as anyone, but I hope you have a more open mind about this effort, if only because the people tasked with leading it (Chalifoux and Novak) are hardly shills for the Unit 4 Administration or its previous leadership.
Skepticism is healthy - declaring that you know what this group will recommend before they've met even once isn't, IMHO.
Xian, I'm so glad to see you have so many opinions about the "best" way to run Champaign schools. It's always comforting when Chicago liberals tell us what's best for us. Hey, here's a thought, maybe people that actually live in this community, pay the property taxes to fund our schools, and have children that attend those schools should be heard instead. Your approach to engineering the schools is already the problem, but you're so convinced your right you can't see it.
"The question I have is whether if you don't like the members of the African American community actively approaching the racial disparity issue, is there someone you think would do a better job?"
Anyone other than Imani Bazzell and Thom Moore could do a better job. They have spent the last 15 years promoting semantic agendas rather than finding solutions. Imani Bazzell should be lecturing no one. She is a major part of the problem.
Until people in this community get backbones and find better people for these committees, these problems will continue.
Those of us who have had to endure the BAZZELL, " I hate whites" manifesto can attest to this person's agenda. Way too large a group and the usual PR people who seem to have a habit of absolutely talking a subject to death! Previous poster was correct, just another attempt to sell a whoppng tax increase and pass it off as," community" inspired.
"The question I have is whether if you don't like the members of the African American community actively approaching the racial disparity issue, is there someone you think would do a better job? Or do you just not want to see the issue addressed at all?"
Certainly, the issue needs addressing! The Urban League folks (Imani, Tracy P, etc.) have been working hard for years on this very issue. Herein lies the problem, and exposes the very lack of vision of the "vision" committee.
Several years ago the social justice agenda folks, through legal manipulations and the resulting consent decree, turned all educational policy focus towards the racial disparity issue. In fact, wielding great financial and legal power, the consent decree crowd became the most powerful special interest group in the district, essentially controlling much of what is going on today in our school buildings.
The problem is, through lack of finances (ironically due, in part, by the legal costs associated w/the consent decree), and lack of thoughtful policy-making on the part of a district administration imported from Texas, the consent decree crowd has inadvertantly been behind some often harmful educational and social practices that have alienated many parents, black and white alike...and not only conservatives, but also moderates and liberals. The district is finding it hard to attract and retain quality principals, teachers, and students, which further aggravates the situation, and further aggravates parents and teachers.
Who would do a better job representing African-Americans? Hmmm...there are many, many community leaders on the North End who could fit the bill, if the vision committee would only look beyond the status quo. No doubt, the consent decree folks should be represented on the vision committee, because I'm sure they have many unrealized dreams for their children. However, the past few years have proven that legal threats alone can't solve the racial problem. Legal threats only result in short-term, reactionary policies. What is needed are more child-centered policies, and more comprehensive representation from the African-American community.
The vision committee that lacks vision. Hmmm...will wait and see, like IP says. However, from the look of things, our district has simply passed from one special interest group to another.
It's a waste of time. Feel-good committees with "long-range" goals, "vision".
Even good people with good intentions and good vision won't fix our local schools, until more is demanded of parents, teachers, and especially students.
NCLB is a disaster, teaching to tests is a disaster, "equity" is a disaster, and the teacher's union along with bringing in a guy who, sad but true, is hired BECAUSE he is Black (how's that Ph.D coming, MR Culver) is a disaster.
Here's "vision": fire Culver and his Texas cronies, and take the bold step of ignoring the union and hiring the best teachers, not just more and more union hacks who can't teach.
Let's consider what this large and esteemed group is tasked with accomplishing:
"...oversee the district's planning process for its building and program needs for the next 20 to 25 years."
Now let's consider the choices (The people who don't appear on this list are people I don't know about):
...just one person's opinion.
What about key people who DO NOT appear on this list?
"...and AnF complained that we couldn't have a list like this without Imani Bazzell on it. What would Fox contribute, even if he showed up?"
I don't want to speak for him, but from my conversations with him, Peter Fox is quite passionate about improving Champaign Schools, and is very experienced in planning, development, etc. I think he's a great addition.
Haha, that's dope. I've really arrived if I'm being attacked as a CHICAGO LIBERAL.
If she is going to ignorantly label me, I would prefer that Carol introduce what makes her more knowledgable on the subject.
I love the last post. Thank you for adding thoughtful analysis to a thread that was mostly hate mongering up to this point. I pretty much agree on every piece of your analysis and would love to see you questions answered. Perhaps you should forward that analysis to the board so we can get some answers.
The only point I disagree on is that I believe that sometimes people who are less measured on racial relations issues are necessary. After all, MLK would not have been nearly as effective if mainstream racist whites were not so afraid of Malcolm X.
MLK, Malcolm X -- sounds like xian should be working with Imani.
She could cover the 15-year grudge corner, and xian could cover the 30-40-year grudge corner. Together they could keep C-U in gridlock for another 25 years, if they work at it.
Businesses have always done long, medium and short range planning. Would we not even do a yearly or 5 year budget? I think with everything that has gone on and will go on in the district it would be a good time to plan for the future.
I don't know the back ground of all the people on the committee but it is a group of people with a lot of different skills and abilities from though out the community, that will give the group balance and hopefully help make it successful.
"Mainstream" racist whites?
Gordy -- you may be right about Peter Fox, and if you have had many conversations with him, then you know him much better than I do. He certainly has the planning and development experience...I think my suspicions would involve his motivation for getting involved if there were no potential Fox Development projects coming out of it. I admit those suspicions might be unfair. Does he have school-age kids?
Xian -- first, I find the hate-mongering increasingly tiresome, so I have made an effort not to participate. This has resulted, unfortunately, in a marked decline in my replies to posts (if you can't say something nice and all that.) But thanks for the acknowledgment.
Per your comment: I completely agree that "people who are less measured on racial relations issues are necessary." However, the current makeup of the list includes at least four individuals who fit that description (Bazzell, Moore, Jackson, Parsons). The input is extremely valuable, but I would be somewhat concerned about the disproportionate influence of such a faction -- much as I would be about over-representation from any group. I would make an exception, I suppose, for representation from the "educational system," for lack of a better term, because they have the strongest vested interest.
So, Xian, are you saying that Bazell is essentially the equivalent of some kind of racial boogeyman? We should be afraid of her and therefore, more likely to work on our racist views? If that's not what you meant, then I'm not understanding your point, and I find someone who makes the generic statement, according to one of the posters above, that whites are by their nature racist or guilty of racism because they don't understand issues facing black children. How is that not, by definition, a racist statement?
Would we not even do a yearly or 5 year budget?
my company only does a 1 year budget - beyond that is 'crystal ball' stuff
We really are doing something now. No, honestly, we are. We formed a committee!
Next up, sub-committees.
Then, break-out sessions.
Yay!
That's funny - I can remember one of the key issues from the last School Board election being that the people currently on the Board wanted to get the community more involved in the schools.
I'm glad they're making the effort, and I wish there was more of this type of community input sought by Unit 4, on a more regular basis.
I'm glad that Unit 4 is seeking input--I hope that there will be plenty of public hearings, etc and that they will really listen to what citizens have to say, even if it isn't something they want to hear.
Thom Moore once thought schools should do 10-year budgets. It's yet another reason why he shouldn't be on this committee.
On the whole, I think it's a good list. Community members, social activists, business leaders... I would think that these people would bring a wealth of ideas to the table. Peter Fox has been very involved with Unit #4 schools and he's donated a significant amount of $$$ to Champaign schools for to purchase computers for computer labs and the like. I just wish they would have included some of the veteran retired teachers who really could provide insight about what it's like to work under the current conditions and what type of facilities would improve instruction and student performance.
Per your comment: I completely agree that "people who are less measured on racial relations issues are necessary." However, the current makeup of the list includes at least four individuals who fit that description (Bazzell, Moore, Jackson, Parsons). The input is extremely valuable, but I would be somewhat concerned about the disproportionate influence of such a faction -- much as I would be about over-representation from any group. I would make an exception, I suppose, for representation from the "educational system," for lack of a better term, because they have the strongest vested interest.
I could see that. However, from my experiences with Moore, I would not describe him that way. But I agree with your overall point. In fact, I'd argue that you've hit on the most compelling problem facing the educational system--massive decisions are being made by people from either side of the political spectrum with zero real time experiencing the realities that a lot of the kids in the system are facing.
I'd also agree with IP though--more community input from stakeholders should be highlighted. I mean that's the amazing thing about the current system--it tends to be dictated by non-students, non-parents, non-teachers, non-community leaders. That's not a recipe for success.
"Mainstream" racist whites?
Yeah, you know--the majority of the country against civil rights at the time. As much as we can talk about existing disparities and areas where things have worsened, certainly we can agree that what are mainstream accepted views of racial identity have shifted since that area.
MLK, Malcolm X -- sounds like xian should be working with Imani.
The idea that it is now some kind of act worthy of mockery to even mention great men who happened to be black is really amazing to me. Surely others on this site find this response as disgusting as I do?
It's one thing to be uninterested in diversity. It's another thing to want to erase great people from the history books or conversation simply because they were black.
Xian, where do you get the idea that people want to erase great black leaders or contributors from history or conversation? You used malcolm X as an example to indicate people were afraid and therefore willing to deal with Dr. King--you think comment on that line of reasoning isn't fair or somehow racist? Are y ou saying that you can throw these comments and examples out there, but any response or comment is inapprorpiate or racist? If you stoop to hyperbole in your argument, isn't this what you can expect?
MLK, Malcolm X -- sounds like xian should be working with Imani.
Right here. This was not "This is not a good comparison". There were civil ways to respond to my comparison.
This was attacking me simply for bring up their names. The poster is clearly irritate to even see Dr. King or Malcolm X's name in conversation. That's horribly troubling.
Are y ou saying that you can throw these comments and examples out there, but any response or comment is inapprorpiate or racist? If you stoop to hyperbole in your argument, isn't this what you can expect?
No, I said nothing of the sort. "Imani Bazzell is Malcolm X" is hyperbole. All I did was say that sometimes it is necessary to have a radical in the discussion. You know--marketplace of ideas and all? Not too many people believe in "Marketplace of Ideas" these days, but I was hoping some would.
At least one person understood how the comparison worked and make a thoughtful refutation of my post which I was moved by and changed. You ither didn't understand how the explanation worked or chose not to. Instead you chose to blatantly mischaracterize my words in a mean-spirited attack. Obviously, considering I responded thoughtfully and reasonable to someone who responded to my example, I'm not saying that "any response or comment is inappropriate or racist".
These days it seems like some folks, white, black, or any other color cannot discuss race at all without assuming that anyone who disagrees with them is calling them a "racist". The only time I mentioned racism in the thread was referring to mainstream whites during the pre-civil rights era. I assume no one disagrees with that?
Otherwise, there is clearly a gap on the belief in institutional racism. There's not much I can do about that. I clearly love and treat people with respect around here. I have cited countless studies showing that racially desperant treatment is rampant in the society whether it be job hiring or real estate, but also that I don't believe it is anymore due to intentional racial prejudice.
But sometimes people aren't interested in such facts and just want to hear that they are being called a "racist". Then they can attack the person and ignore that argument.
It's too bad, since there are quite a number of folks around here who enjoy thoughtful discussions on these issues. But a couple people not ready or willing for that can poison a discussion.
"But a couple people not ready or willing for that can poison a discussion."
Hence, the example of Bazzell and Moore. They shouldn't be on this committee. They've been wrecking efforts like this for years with semantic-based hate. It's time to stop listening to them.
It's always interesting how certain people keep showing up in any type of community project regardless of their expertise. I suspect it has something to do with their W-2's. Here's an idea , why not put a "real " cross section of the community on the committee, and not just the "movers/shakers/headliners"? Let's start by adding these folks
Truck Driver, a Construction worker,a stay at home mom, an unemployed parent,a wal-mart employee.
This community has a bad, bad habit of only listening to a certain grain of folks.
Yes, I agree, JohnBoy. My point earlier in this thread is that the committee needs more balanced representation. I agree that many if not all these individuals are fine people and have shown support for public education in many ways. However, what concerns me is exactly what you point out.. .besides the balancing of Feinen with Jackson, there really is no other "balancing" going on...I also agree with anonymous at 6:41pm who points out the glaring low representation of teachers. What Unit 4 parents and stake-holders might say in the long run is "these folks and their agendas don't represent me", and this will not bode well for any referendum. Lots of people care deeply about the schools, even though they don't have friends in high places, or have the money or time to be on a "board" or "Foundation".
So while it seems, on the surface, that I am being critical of this new initiative, what I really want is for the school board to SUCCEED in their attempts to re-engage the public!
I have read through the comments posted to date and wanted to take a few minutes and respond to some.
I realize that we will never please everyone with our choice of a Vision Committee, nor its size. However, we did the best we could to make it represent the community. In addition, there are several "just plain parents" on the group although, in the interest of keeping the group small, they may also represent other groups, i.e. hispanics, special education, etc.
Several people have commented that this group can't get the work done. And I agree, but by design. Most of the people on this group are not going to have the time to roll up their sleaves and help us get a plan done, but they can, and need to, contribute to a plan that effects our community. We expect that the real work in this process will will take place in a series of community meetings and other forms of gathering information. Tentatively, we are planning 2 meetings a month. These meetings will take many forms and have many focuses to help us to gather information. We will keep the community up-to-date as to how this process will move forward. These meetings are where we want the input from parents, teachers, staff, community!
There were also comments that this just being another scheme for a referendum. Again, this is a planning process. We see the product of this effort being a plan. If in the end, the community wants to implement what they have asked for, they can choose the means to finance it. We would like that to not be up to us, but rather the people who work through this process. We all know that if the community wants improvements to our schools, it will cost money. But, if and when we do need to spend money, lets do it in a planned, effective, and efficient manner.
When I ran for this possittion, it was mostly based not being happy with the current state of affairs and on the District needing a clear road to follow as far as our programs and infrastructure. I will do the best that I can to see that happen. But I do ask that all of you help us to come to some reasonable plan and action. We will be looking for your constructive feedback and suggestions.
Kristine Chalifoux, Unit 4 Board of Education
"When I ran for this possittion, it was mostly based not being happy with the current state of affairs and on the District needing a clear road to follow as far as our programs and infrastructure."
Yet you choose people who have steered the district into its current state of affairs. Brilliant!
I could not have hand picked a better group to insure defeat of a tax referendum,,,,,Thankyou Ms. Chalifoux, Sincerely so.
I hope some of you keep these responses in mind the next time someone complains that elected officials don't listen.
That is precisely the problem Gordy,,,,they do not listen,,and apparently do not have the ability to learn from past failures either. The problems Unit 4 faces,,,,,,,are in real time!, not some Dr. Who episode. 10 to 25 years from is wasted time, we cannot even get some of these kids to the required reading levels now, forget the future, live now and fix it now. Most of the people on the list appear to be there for window dressing,,,,,and or, politcal correctness purposes, in my opinion. The defeat of the last referendum was not just about the money, it was about the consent degree,,,the 2 million or more a year being sunk into legal fees over it, the double talk on Mr, Arhtur Culver and just about any subject, the contract extensions given out without any rhyme nor reason to most people, what were his laid out goals? These kids in Unit 4, are not widgets in a factory waiting for some committee to decide if LIFO or FIFO would be a better method. Public schools as we know them will probably not even exist in their present form 1o to 25 years from now,,,,,,,the feds and the states will see to that,,,so deal with real time. Do not try and BS people into thinking this is aobut anything but getting a big tax increase, that is all is about,because withouf a big tax increase that pie in the sky wish list, is just that,a pie in the sky wish list, Savoy would be better served to looking into starting their own grade school district,and checking with Tolono for the upper grades,they need to start a school district correctly for themselves from the bottom up, keep it on a steady course,and leave the baggage of Champaign Unit 4 behind them, that is just my opinion on the whole subject.
"I hope some of you keep these responses in mind the next time someone complains that elected officials don't listen."
They still don't listen, though, or at least they only hear what they want to hear. They keep including the same people who have done nothing but hold back the schools for 15 years while they preach their semantic agendas.
There is no way on God's green earth a referendum concocted by this bunch will get even a third of the vote. You may as well take all the meeting time on this issue and bottle all the hot air that will come out of said meetings and try to package it for some other use.
A PS needs to be added,,,let us not forget that all of the other taxing bodies have not been heard from yet. The City of Champaign, and the MTD, have already announced their demands,,,,,,,who else may come forwrd for more tax money,the money pie is already getting pretty chewed, of course in reality, we really could survive just fine with out the MTD, and if the city had been funding the pension plans in an orderly and yearly way like responsible governments should do,,,and also have had the streets on a yearly planned repair scedule,,,they would not need all of this extra money now,,,,,never fails,,,,,,,everything becomes a crisis at once in government.
So I gather from these last two comments that you think that Unit 4 is doomed to failure?
If not, how would you improve it? How should the new Board move forward? What sort of realistic, constructive suggestions would you make besides "Unit 4 is led by nincompoops." and "This is all a front for a tax increase."?
They're asking for input, people. Do you really have to be so cynical and insulting?
If you think this is a front for a tax increase, please offer suggestions for how the District could improve its facilities and meet its needs for the next decade without a tax increase.
If you think the Consent Decree is destructive, please explain how Unit 4 can legally abandon it immediately without sanctions.
You seem to be smart, passionate people - help them come up with creative solutions to the problems that we can all see that they have. They're asking for your help.
It's doomed to failure until it excludes the people who have doomed it to failure.
It won't do that, so it's doomed to failure. The state needs to prepare to take over; somehow a community with a major university cannot run a high school district properly.
"It's doomed to failure until it excludes the people who have doomed it to failure."
Please share a list of those people, and why they've doomed it to failure. Who needs to be eliminated from having anything to do with Unit 4 before it will be successful? (Yes, this is a serious question.)
It is a misfortune that they cannot abandon it now,,,and an even bigger misfortune that doing what was legally and morally correct years ago escaped the board at that time. Cynical!, of course I am,,,they need to just tell it up front,,,be straight,,,,,,,dont double talk like Mr. Culver has done in the past,,,,like promising a school north of University Ave.....but build it four miles or more away from the population that the consent degree EXPRESSLY, states are the ones to benefit from that school,,,. Get the television and radio stations to give them air time,they will , get the News-Gazette to give them all the print space they need,,,,,and put it simple. " We have a problem with our schools,,,,we have not in the past met our requirements for fair and equal eduacation for all, because of this neglect, we are under a Federal Consent degree that is designed to make us do what we should have been doing all along, we are not going to continue to play up the minor success's, and spin the failures. We need a fair and equitable tax increase to help us reach our goals, and save our school district". Then they can detail exactly what it is that needs done,,,,,,,and how they are going to do it, step by step. dollar by dollar,,,,what the value will be in return for each dollar spent. One thing, they must not do,is have the tv stations show some minor damage in need of repair,,,,like the county did at the old nursing home and make it look like the building is falling down just to get more money, It worked with the nursing home once,,,,,but I think people have learned a valuable lesson from that deal. Blue Ribbon panels have not much utility, in situations like this one, I would have liked to see those two ladies that wanted to start a charter school on the panel,,,,why did they think black children were not getting a good education in Unit 4, they have something of value to say, and they are vested in it. Now, what do we have,many families have their kids going to private school,,,they live in Unit 4's area,,,they sure are not going to vote yes, we have a senior population that is getting hit on all sides,they cannot afford much more either,,,,,and many working people in this supposed town of plenty have not had a regular pay raise in years,,not even a cola,,so I doubt they will vote yes on top of the MTD, and the City of Champaign,,,,so you ask do I think Unit 4 is down the john? no not yet,,,,,,,,but it sure is on life support,,,,,and the time for panels and wish lists is long past,,,,it is time to just lay all the cards on the table and play them. Will a referendum pass? I doubt it, but at least they can put forward the right effort to have a chance,,,,,right now it is slim and none, As for me,,,I am far to unsophisticated for that group, I am pretty good at doing, when I want to be that way,,,,,but, they would not want me,,,,,nuff said. :)
"so you ask do I think Unit 4 is down the john? no not yet,,,,,,,,but it sure is on life support,,,,,and the time for panels and wish lists is long past,,,,it is time to just lay all the cards on the table and play them. Will a referendum pass? I doubt it, but at least they can put forward the right effort to have a chance,,,,,right now it is slim and none, As for me,,,I am far to unsophisticated for that group, I am pretty good at doing, when I want to be that way,,,,,but, they would not want me,,,,,nuff said. :)"
So - again, I ask: what can Unit 4 do to fix things without a tax increase? They're asking for suggestions - what are yours? :-)
Gordy,,,,,,,at this point a tax increase is about the only solution,,,,Yes,,,,,I do recognize the irony of my statement :-), to get this mess cleared up they do need the extra capital to be able to have the wiggle room, the state will not provide it,,,,,the feds will not provide it,,,,,,but, I really believe that the locals have had enough of it,,,,,really I do, It would be simple to say, go to the Unit 4 web site and every persons picture on there needs to have their contracts bought out and sent down the road,,,,,(more money), and we dont have it,,,,but I am pretty sure , that one act would get them a thousand yes votes, at least,,but it is a harse way to go. Barring that,,,,,in my opinion,,,the Unit 4 familes by and large lost confidence in the current administration long ago,,,,and I mean families pretty much across the spectrum,,,,,but they are hampered by the actions of past boards in extending contracts,,,cost prohibitive,,,,Catch 22,,,,as long as Mr. Culver is in charge,,it will be very hard to pass any thing,,,,but to pay him and his assistants off would break the district,,,,just my opinion of course:-),,,,,But,,,,,,,too save the district,,,,the bullet may have to be bitten,,,,,and that is a tough call, :-) Ain't politics fun:)!!'
Thanks - at least you're honest.
I think there's a lot that Unit 4 can do prior to considering a tax increase, and the first is to get some the community re-invested in the District. And that starts by asking for input and listening to it and taking action based on it. Which is why I think this process/committee/whatever needs to be given a fair chance - it's an opportunity to start rebuilding the connection between the community and Unit 4. Will it work? Who knows. But let's give it a good faith effort before writing it off.
That's my opinion, anyway.
Dont tell anyone this,,,,,,,but contrary to what I write and say alot,,,,,in my other "ego" that I use,,,,,,,I agree with you're opinions about 98% of the time,,,,,,,,and before you belittle that statement,,,,,I only agree with myself about 75% of the time:-)
Thanks.
You've officially made my day. :-)
Re: tax increase
Last data I saw from the architects, the actual tax increase to remodel the buildings and build new necessary facilities is actually $200 or so million. The $66 mil bond proposal was the first of three. I'm not sure what could have changed that would have brought this number down, it was characterized to me that the $200 mil was necessary maintenance or construction. That amount is roughly (and I mean very rough) about $10,000 additional per student.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
Makeup of the committee aside, I think two critical issues have been raised in this thread, and these must be addressed by this committee if positive results are going to be achieved.
1. Lack of confidence -- for some, even lack of trust -- in the Unit 4 leadership. This starts with Arthur Culver and spreads thoughout the district, but please keep in mind that the majority of the employees in Unit 4 are skilled, dedicated, and worthy of our support. I don't know Culver at all, having heard him speak only a couple of times. But I have heard many people say he is an intelligent and very decent man. He can be those things and still be accountable for significant mistakes in policy, actions, and leadership, so let's keep our focus.
2. The last referendum failed primarily because of reason #1 above. If the goal of the committee is to produce a strategy and plan for future development of the district, then that will require money. To get additional dollars out of the taxpayers in this district, both the plan and the people must have the support of those taxpayers.
In my opinion, any efforts spent by this committee that do not address the two items above will not produce the desired results. This is not a prediction of failure, but a simple attempt to provide some useful perspective.
I would dispute the statement that the referendum failed primarily because of the lack of trust. The played a significant role, no doubt, but it wasn't primary, IMO. Continuous rising property taxes, schools that are perceived to be academically poor, school building location that alienated an important segment of the community... those all played too.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
I won't discount the frustration over rising property taxes, for sure. But I might suggest that "schools that are perceived to be academically poor, school building location that alienated an important segment of the community" might be considered examples under the more general lack of confidence problem. If we were confident in the leadership, we would feel assured that these issues would be addressed and resolved.
"Please share a list of those people, and why they've doomed it to failure. Who needs to be eliminated from having anything to do with Unit 4 before it will be successful? (Yes, this is a serious question.)"
Seems like this has been answered quite often, almost to the point of beating it into the ground.
I've mentioned two names. There may be more, but I'll stick with those two. Their history of non-performance and semantic agendas goes back to the early 1990s, perhaps farther.
The only escape I see is for the community to admit it's failed and that it can't run a high school. Let the state take over and set things right. Create a document barring the semantic agenda-based people from further participation.
Extreme? Yes. Extreme problems call for extreme measures. The community has failed the school; it's time to surrender.
Hapless Semantic Quo Defenders!
"I've mentioned two names. There may be more, but I'll stick with those two. Their history of non-performance and semantic agendas goes back to the early 1990s, perhaps farther."
Your objections to Bazzell and Moore are noted. Do you really think that Unit 4 is doomed to failure because of the participation of these two in an unofficial advisory committee?
"The only escape I see is for the community to admit it's failed and that it can't run a high school. Let the state take over and set things right. Create a document barring the semantic agenda-based people from further participation."
Again, apart from Bazzell and Moore, why do you think this community cannot run a high school? What makes you say that? Are there any other options you would suggest besides state control?
Thanks.
"Hapless Semantic Quo Defenders!"
:-)
It's doomed to failure because it's made so many mistakes that it has no ability to correct now, even if it intended to correct any of them, which it doesn't. This whole committee is a big dog-and-pony show.
Other than state takeover, I guess there could be the offering of vouchers for people to attend private schools. Or perhaps the National Guard could step in. Or maybe Champaign could simply close the schools, but I'd bet the state would have something to say about that.
But it's time to realize the community has failed on this issue. This is why electing public school boards can be dangerous: Too often the people who are elected can't do the job.
I'd be curious to know if St. Thomas More (sp?) or Judah have long term plans?
Judah already is planning for expansion. St. Thomas More needs to get ready -- a shift is near.
"Other than state takeover, I guess there could be the offering of vouchers for people to attend private schools. Or perhaps the National Guard could step in. Or maybe Champaign could simply close the schools, but I'd bet the state would have something to say about that.
But it's time to realize the community has failed on this issue. This is why electing public school boards can be dangerous: Too often the people who are elected can't do the job."
Why? What good does "realizing that the community has failed" do? Even if I agreed with you (I don't) - what is accomplished by trumpeting that realization?
Not a single "solution" you've offered is either legal or possible.
Why not roll up your (our) sleeves and see if the intelligent, creative people we have in the community can help find possible (rather than impossible) solutions for the District?
Why not truly bite the bullet....and ABANDON THE CONSENT DECREE? With the money wasted on this ridiculous decree, the money problems of the school district could have been solved years ago. I ask all of you to read again N/G articles on these $200 phone calls, and the other silliness with the decree. Just say NO to the decree , and in the long run it's got to be less expensive than this UNENDING decree. These lawyers have a life time job here in 116...why would they close up the money flow and end the decree!
"Why not truly bite the bullet....and ABANDON THE CONSENT DECREE?"
Please explain how to do so legally before its scheduled expiration.
The realization allows for a solution. Otherwise we're down to hearing Imani and Thom lecture us for another 10-15 years while the schools crumble.
The board chose its direction. It chose poorly. It failed.
Now we must prepare for mass exodus.
"The realization allows for a solution."
What solution? You've proposed nothing legal or possible. What solutions are made possible by screaming "We've failed!" from the rooftops?
And, yes, I'm seriously asking. What do you propose we do, after failure is "realized?"
Some of us were at the PTA Council President's dinner last night with school board members, principals, administrators (including Culver and Dorland Norris) and this IP thread came up several times during the open forum.
All the individuals, from what I could tell, at this dinner are very involved in the schools (besides obviously the Unit 4 staffers), and understand what's happening on a day-to-day basis. They are precisely the kind of "roll-up the sleeves" individuals IP is talking about. However, after the question-and-answer session was done, several folks hung back and admitted that although they were enthusiastic about the idea of a vision committee, they felt they and their concerns weren't represented on the vision committee. And these are the very people who are "key" to promoting involvement in the schools. And they are articulate!
In general, the mood at the forum was positive, with lots of support for the schools. There were also some serious questions for the board members:
For example: Big.Small.All spent over a year formulating a "vision" for education in this county. Has the board approached this organization for input? (it appeared the answer was "they hadn't, but would look into it")
Why aren't there any Latino/as on the committee since this is such a growing part of the community? (Answer: "we're working on that but haven't gotten any firm responses yet")
If you plan to hold community meetings to gather input, then why is this additional committee of almost 30 people needed? (answer: not quite clear, but part of the response included a need for strategic planning in the district that business folks could provide)
Also a general comment about community representation not being broad enough. (answer: our committee includes a broad representation of the community and we're planning to hold community meetings so everyone can participate)
Certainly, Mrs. Chalifoux seemed sincere in her desire to gather as much information as possible from every segment of the community.
One final thing I heard in the general discussion: there is a serious disconnect between the board/administration and the general public. Often, administrators or board members are "surprised" by concerns brought up by community members. Hello?
So, my first thought would be to fix this right away, because no district can operate so far removed from their constituents. Does this "vision" committee really address this disconnect? Do they really represent the public at large, those who volunteer on a regular basis, those who propogate opinions in the parking lots/playgrounds, those who stand in front of parents and children every day, those who have vested interest, their children especially, in the schools? This is where I would start, from the ground up.
"Why aren't there any Latino/as on the committee since this is such a growing part of the community? (Answer: "we're working on that but haven't gotten any firm responses yet")"
So at least some respresentatives from that community have been asked, but have not yet agreed to participate. As I said, this is a work in progress - let's see how it goes for a bit, and see if any additions or changes are made.
"If you plan to hold community meetings to gather input, then why is this additional committee of almost 30 people needed? (answer: not quite clear, but part of the response included a need for strategic planning in the district that business folks could provide)"
That's my understanding, too - to lead the strategic planning process, and help facilitate, gather and organize community input.
"So, my first thought would be to fix this right away, because no district can operate so far removed from their constituents. Does this "vision" committee really address this disconnect? Do they really represent the public at large, those who volunteer on a regular basis, those who propogate opinions in the parking lots/playgrounds, those who stand in front of parents and children every day, those who have vested interest, their children especially, in the schools? This is where I would start, from the ground up."
Good suggestion. I think the answer to both your questions is "Not entirely, but it could be a good start." But only if it's given a chance.
Thanks for the thoughtful response.
from a philosophical point of view, this whole thread is quite amusing. If the public school district acted like a business, in competition for customers, they would be talking to their customers, or potential customers - parents.
Ask parents what they like, what they don't. Ask ex-customers (those at Judah or St. Joe...) if anything could have been done to keep them in the district, or what might bring them back. And you don't need forums. Principals should be on playgrounds - teachers have conferences. Mingle after music programs. Forums are for activists, or people really pissed off. Most of us just deal with it and move on.
If the school district thinks its mission is to please the "community" instead of pleasing their customers, the parents, then it will continue to lose students to private school and neighboring districts.
Just my 2 cents.
RSWB's point is an excellent one. While we can't rely exclusively on parental input to shape this long-range plan, not granting such input the importance it deserves is a huge mistake.
Perhaps there are those in Unit 4 leadership who believe their expertise trumps parental input. Perhaps there are others who are intimidated by the prospect of facing their customers. I don't know.
"Perhaps there are those in Unit 4 leadership who believe their expertise trumps parental input. Perhaps there are others who are intimidated by the prospect of facing their customers."
I'm sure that's the case, but perhaps this could also be viewed as a the district's leadership (at least the elected leadership) trying to make a good first step towards reconnecting with parents?
Exactly -- that's the hope. Maybe I wasn't clear -- my comment applied specifically to the current Unit 4 leadership (admin, board) rather than the new committee as a whole.
I have high hopes for the new Board, actually. The Admin? Meh - I leave that to the Board.
The solution is for the state to take over, disband the board, destroy the consent decree and ban anyone involved with its creation from ever participating in managing the district again.
Then lawsuits should be filed for gross negligence against multiple parties.
Back to the composition of this vestigal committee: Is there anyone who was in a Unit 4 (or its predecessor) classroom as a student in the last 25 years? 30 years?
"The solution is for the state to take over, disband the board, destroy the consent decree and ban anyone involved with its creation from ever participating in managing the district again."
As I said, this isn't a realisitic option.
Nor is expecting progress from this committee.
"Nor is expecting progress from this committee."
And yet you're unable or unwilling to suggest any constructive, realistic or legal options for achieving progress.
As I've said repeatedly - if you know how to fix the problems, your input is needed. Responding with repetitive demands that cannot ever be implemented makes you no better than the people who created this mess.
Sorry, I think I've made suggestions. You just don't like them.
Having some people who actually went to the school in the last quarter century would be great. Instead, we have the usual elitists. (And Thom and Imani; wouldn't want to include them with the targets of their lecturing).
"Sorry, I think I've made suggestions. You just don't like them."
I'm sorry, but "disband the District and start the exodus" aren't realistic suggestions. And "ignore the Consent Decree" cannot be done legally.
"Having some people who actually went to the school in the last quarter century would be great."
Now that's a suggestion - I think it's been met, but I don't know all the bios for all the members. But I will pass it on.
Thanks.
Someone who's taken classes in the district even more recently would be even better, but I wouldn't want to hurt the elitists' egos too much.
And the proper phrase was "destroy the consent decree." Simply ignoring it gives ammunition to the semantic agendaists.
When I look at this situation, what I see is a total disconnect between several groups. Without even discussing the BOE and community, why is it that there is so much disgust between the social justice people and the right? When I am in the schools I repeatedly see misunderstandings and miscommunication based at least partly on different world views. It is a fact that in the last round of referenda (that ended up with Stratton and Barkstall being built) that Stratton alone was defeated numerous times. When Barkstall was paired with it, then the Southwest Champaign and Savoy people went for it. Why? I can't believe that people just don't care about the substandard education Unit 4 has given to African American students for so long so why? I think it comes down to cultural/ worldview issues. Blacks and whites just don't experience the world the same way and so I would love to see some sort of real attempt to bridge that gap. There are all sorts of people who do "Conflict Transformation" who could come in and lessen the tension between and among all the people who have a stake in the schools.
There are so many people who want Unit 4 to provide good education many of whom are willing to work for it. How is it that we can't tap in to that and all pull in the same direction? I would love to see something more concrete than a vision committee. As an earlier post stated, this is in real time. Other politicians have offices and community access time built into their schedules. I think "office hours" at the Mellon building would be as well attended as any prof's office hours are on campus but what about having them at the Esquire or Memphis on Main, Hubers, etc. The District staff needs to put loads more time into *not* marketing but really and truly connecting with people. There is tons of good news, let's get that out there (without pretending it is all good news). I can hardly imagine a $100 million "business" with so many volunteers ignoring them as deliberately as Unit 4 does.
You could try calling an administrator, board member or serve on one of the committees if you want to be "real time". You might even volunteer to be a mentor or help in a classroom. I think the voters just put the people in office that came up with the idea of this Planning Committee; I think that is the process we have for deciding our leaders give them a chance, if you don't like what they do then run against them next time.
"I think the voters just put the people in office that came up with the idea of this Planning Committee; I think that is the process we have for deciding our leaders give them a chance, if you don't like what they do then run against them next time."
Brilliant. So, in other words, no one should oppose anything because those people were elected. Mmm-kay. And people should just be rushing forward to join a no-win effort that's been made harder because of repeated bad decisions made by Unit 4. Another mmm-kay.
I've got a better idea: Oppose this committee. Oppose the agenda. Oppose the incumbents. Get some people on the board who will stand up to semantic-based agendaites and not keep naming them to pointless, doomed-to-fail committees.
"Oppose the incumbents."
Yes, because they've been in office for five whole months after being elected overwhelmingly.
What, exactly, are your complaints with what these people have done in the last five months?
And where were your doomsday complaints during the election? I didn't notice anybody campaigning for Unit 4 Board on the platform of "This town cannot run a school, so we need to disband the district." I bet you would have gotten a few dozen votes, though.
"What, exactly, are your complaints with what these people have done in the last five months?"
Isn't this really clear by now?
"And where were your doomsday complaints during the election?" My crystal ball was broken that day. I assumed foolishly that the board would realize it's in a time of crisis and would act accordingly, rather than turning to the same elitists and semantic agendaists that have failed time and time again up to now.
My bad.
Isn't this really clear by now?
No.
My crystal ball was broken that day. I assumed foolishly that the board would realize it's in a time of crisis and would act accordingly, rather than turning to the same elitists and semantic agendaists that have failed time and time again up to now.
My bad.
Hapless Semantic Quo Defender.
Where do I sign up to join the semantic agendaists? I hear they have cool hats.
IP, kudos for seeking constructive options
On November 3rd, 2007 at 06:04 PM, Anonymous (not verified) said:
"What, exactly, are your complaints with what these people have done in the last five months?"
Isn't this really clear by now?
"And where were your doomsday complaints during the election?" My crystal ball was broken that day. I assumed foolishly that the board would realize it's in a time of crisis and would act accordingly, rather than turning to the same elitists and semantic agendaists that have failed time and time again up to now.
My bad.
"and although my eyes were open
they might have just as well've been closed"
Procol Harum "A Whiter Shade Of Pale"
Attach the schools district to Parkland Community College. They have done a pretty good job.
If that's not clear, some people need to improve their reading skills.
Is that the royal "some people"?
You can read it as "saw" people.
Until this community is ready to address the real issues that cause the problems that end up in the school system, there will be no traction.
The lack of parental support and involvement in a child's life and education are the root causes of all the schoold districts woes, here and across the nation.
Urbana schools provide breakfast, lunch, and dinner. They extend the day, both before and after school. Both Unit 4 and 116 are considering early childhood programs to get to our communities kids earlier. Why? Because our communities parents are abdicating their parental responsibilities (knowingly or not) to the system.
Systems don't raise kids well. Systems cause resentment, recalcitrance, and rejection of authority. Parents are both the problem and the solution.
I agree for the most part. That being said, there are democratic societies with schools systems that do a better job of catching students whose parents are not capable of providing the parenting necessary for the kids to thrive.
Just abandon the decree.....sounds simplistic, but why not just refuse to go along with the decree? What's the worse that could happen? State takeover? Which might prove to add some sensibility to the situation. I cannot see the prudence in following along with this decree and the enormous backlash, exodus of students and general distrust it has generated for the district. The legal fees/lawsuits that would follow surely would be less than an UNDENDING decree cycle of lawyer's fees. We need some board members that recognize this craziness and at least have some gumption to say, " ENOUGH IS ENOUGH".
Anyone who has read about or lived in Rockford knows why that would be a bad idea JohnBoy.
"Just abandon the decree.....sounds simplistic, but why not just refuse to go along with the decree? What's the worse that could happen? State takeover? Which might prove to add some sensibility to the situation. I cannot see the prudence in following along with this decree and the enormous backlash, exodus of students and general distrust it has generated for the district. The legal fees/lawsuits that would follow surely would be less than an UNDENDING decree cycle of lawyer's fees. We need some board members that recognize this craziness and at least have some gumption to say, " ENOUGH IS ENOUGH"."
I'm fuzzy on the details, but I believe that the decree is scheduled to expire soon (in 2008 or 2009) if the Federal Judge administering it thinks that Unit 4 has made sufficient progress towards addressing the concerns that led to it.
And, let's not forget, for as onerous as the Decree is, there were some real inequalities that led to the lawsuit that resulted in Unit 4 agreeing (unwisely, IMHO) to the Decree. Pretending that such inequalities didn't exist would not be a good thing - it will not be good for Unit 4 to have a large segment of the population convinced that the district doesn't serve its needs. In fact, that's one of Unit 4's biggest problems - there's no reason to trade one disaffected group off for another. There needs to be a good faith effort to provide quality for everyone.
"There needs to be a good faith effort to provide quality for everyone."
And right now, there's quality for no one. It's not about effort; it's about results.
Also, the citation of the Rockford example is just another shallow response. Do some homework and find out what really happened there.
AM I the only one that has this impression that the DECREE is going to be unending and extended again?
"And right now, there's quality for no one. It's not about effort; it's about results."
Actually, it's about both. One follows from the other.
"AM I the only one that has this impression that the DECREE is going to be unending and extended again?"
Remember - the original decree was an agreement between plaintiffs and Unit 4, to avoid litigation. Will Unit 4 agree to extend it, or push to end it, even to the point of being willing to fight litigation? What will the Federal courts push? What will the plaintiffs do?
"Also, the citation of the Rockford example is just another shallow response. Do some homework and find out what really happened there".--I think that is what I said, I do know what happened there and it was a bigger mess then here. The Consent Decree here says that the school district can't even fight the Consent Decree. It would take a lawsuit by parents, that would probably drag out the end of the current Consent Decree, which I think has to be voted on by the school board it isn't automatic.
"Actually, it's about both. One follows from the other."
And how long have you been having these schizoid, free-form delusions? The "results" we've seen from the "effort" leave a lot to be desired.
"And how long have you been having these schizoid, free-form delusions? The "results" we've seen from the "effort" leave a lot to be desired."
Actually, up until now, I had questions about the direction of the efforts, let alone the results. But as I've said here a few dozens times, I'm encouraged by the Board, by this new effort to re-connect with the community and I'm willing to give them a chance. Of course, I see no other realistic alternative, and you've not provided any.
Rather than mimic you, then, and do nothing by cry that the sky is falling, I'm going to keep making suggestions and encouraging those involved to do the things that I think will improve the school district. I'm no expert, and I certainly don't harbor any illusions that anyone will listen to me, but I find being constructive is so much more helpful that screaming at everyone involved that they've already failed and everything is hopeless.
To each their own. Have a great day.
"by this new effort to re-connect with the community"
Schizoid, free-form delusion.
I think I've been clear about what needs to happen: Stop letting a couple of people use the school system as the rope for their tug-of-war games.
You choose to live in blissful ignorance of what's happening. Keep smiling!
"I think I've been clear about what needs to happen: Stop letting a couple of people use the school system as the rope for their tug-of-war games."
Actually, you've been clear that you think there's nobody in this community that can run a school district. I heartily disagree.
Funny -- the South Park where people keep suing the school is on. I guess it's not as funny when it's real, though.
People on the committee probably like this line from the show: "Suing people kicks ass!"
HOw can a school board agree not to fight a consent decree that they agreed to....the logic is a pretty good stretch.
That must mean you haven't read the consent decree John Boy. You may want to educate yourself on the facts before you comment more. Facts haven't stopped anyone else from commenting on this blog though.
From an old rant of mine about the consent decree: Fighting Statistics with Racism Fails Again
At this late stage in the game, this seems unlike as well. But if the Consent Decree gets continued... probably worth considering.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed