When the board must manufacture evidence for an upcoming trial.
So, a Special Called Meeting was called Monday, August 24. Many felt this was an opportunity for the board chair to campaign, as the meeting was short and the board chair acted relatively normal – and, the board chair has not been seen campaigning for the upcoming school board election.
But no. Many of us thought it strange that a lone principal was scheduled to ask for biology equipment for his school’s biology lab – especially at a “Special Called Meeting”. We asked each other if this would be a new trend – that school administrators would have to address the board for their school’s supplies. Seemed a little strange.
Until Mr. Schwartz produced “P-72” (Plaintiff’s Exhibit #72) entitled “Additional Needs of the School System” at trial last week. Among the many items on that list was equipping school science labs.
Among P-72’s “additional needs”:
Restore certified supplements ($1.5m)
Restore classified hours ($565k)
Restore coaching/band/club supplements($45k)
Equip school science labs ($25 k)
Tech upgrades/software requests ($5mil)
Funding for the high schools ($2.2 mil)
Look – most agree that the schools could use more money. But why did all of these “needs” just come to light in the last week or so?
When Mr. Sherrill was asked when this list was compiled, he answered – “2 weeks ago.”
The items on the list totaled $13.5 million dollars. To which the Judge responded:
“Do you really expect me to enter an order to make the Board of Commissioners come up with $13.5 million?”
“No.” replied Mr. Schwartz.
The Judge continued: “the point is . . . ‘what amount is needed to maintain free public schools’ - the evidence goes to the credibility of the witness – suddenly I have a witness who says the budget is double? ‘Need’ does not mean a wish list.”
There were questions about reversions back to the state – and when the board knew about them. They were not clearly answered, but my recollection and review of meetings indicates the administration had knowledge of these reversions and the amount of them before they submitted their budget to the Commissioners.
At one point Mr. Sherrill indicated that the Central Office could not afford to purchase copy paper and had to borrow it. He was asked from whom it was borrowed. He answered “Schwartz and Shaw.”
Just so you know, I took really good notes of Mr. Sherrill’s testimony, and some mediocre notes of Mr. Lawson’s testimony. I should be writing about the two competing standards of law that the judge must decide between, or that problematic little North Carolina Supreme Court case that was handed down on Friday that significantly limits what the word “needs” means when interpreting NCGS 115C-431. (Yes, the Beaufort county case has been decided.)
It is just that some things seem so contrived.
Like the lack of office supplies at the Central Office when there apparently are pallets full of copy paper at the school warehouse.
Like ‘poor mouthing’ about things like postage when a local business offered to give the Central Office money for postage but declined to do so after the businessman was told he’d have to talk to Mr. Sherrill first.
Like a “special called meeting” where the main attractions are how the school system is going to deal with H1N1 (which includes the wiping down of outdoor play ground equipment with germicide?) and the plea from a principal for more microscopes and frogs for his middle school biology lab. (Oh yes - Mr. Lawson answered that the board became aware of this request for biology supplies two weeks ago at a board meeting. The correct answer is that the board became aware of this 4 days earlier at a "Special Called" meeting.) One more thing: I am not suggesting the principal was complicit in this exercise! My guess is that he was just doing what he was told to do by Mr. Sherrill or Ms. Norman (She did remark that they had "talked last week.")
I was not at the hearing to witness Ms. Norman’s testimony. It sounds like even though it only lasted a couple of minutes, it was very interesting.
I understand that the board is going to be interviewing superintendent candidates at the Charlotte Renaissance Hotel this week. And it is possible that SACS will send its conclusions of the investigation this week or next. And of course the hearing will be on-going.
I am all for multi-tasking, but really, this school board majority is doing all of this at once?
Anyone else have an issue with this?
Again, I am all for getting the schools more money to make them more competitive with the rest of the world. My fellow running mates and I see the quick restoration of classified and certified pay as essential. I also think the middle school biology labs should be equipped with microscopes and slides (frogs for dissection? Not so much.)
I am sure that the board of commissioners wants the best for our kids, too. That is why they have exercised their discretion in these lean times to make the BOE account for the money that they want to spend.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Better Late Than Never -
Unfortunately I do not have the ability to consistently attend the BOE v. BOC hearing, so I have not felt qualified to comment. I understand that there are many folks who would like constant updates on the progress of the case, and I apologize if my readers have been counting on me for that. I will attempt to give you some insight into what I have witnessed. (Mr. Welker of the Morganton News Herald wrote a much better account of this hearing than I have written here.)
I attended the hearing regarding the Motion to Recuse Judge Robert Ervin from adjudicating the case. The pleadings in that case were a puzzlement. There were blatant misstatements of fact in the Motion, and there were blatant misstatements of fact in Ms. Norman’s affidavit. In my limited experience with expensive, “Big City” lawyers, one gets what one pays for – in other words – top notch attorneys and top notch product. In this case, however, it appeared to me that the BOE was relying on a firm that couldn’t even verify verifiable facts, and had no problem submitting the Motion pleadings and Ms. Norman’s inaccurate affidavit as evidence.
Anyway, Mr. Schwartz began arguing the motion by telling the judge that this case was more contentious than any other that he had ever been involved. Mr. Schwartz should know – he has been involved in many controversial cases. Here is one – this is from August 28, 2008 “News Argus” regarding a suit by the Duplin County BOE against the Duplin County Commissioners:
And this from Atlanta Journal Constitution March, 2008 regarding Clayton County, Ga.:
Mr. Schwartz went on. And on. And on. He told the judge he had litigated these kinds of matters all over the state. He read aloud in court an article written in the Morganton News Herald about a rally for David Burleson held in March. He submitted comments by bloggers who criticized the board majority’s stance on issues. He referred to Judge Ervin’s former law firm and their pro bono representation of tax payers who had filed suit to enjoin the termination of former Superintendent Burleson. He told the judge that at the June 30th board meeting, in the presence of 250 people, some members of the public had destroyed some board member’s name plates. (I was at that board meeting. I did not see any name plates destroyed. I did see that someone had moved them around to different seats – but no destruction. Apparently he means a different board meeting?) Over and over again Schwartz complained that Judge Ervin had not voluntarily recused himself from the case, and that failure had put the BOE’s case in jeopardy – because they had to reveal their strategy at this hearing. Then he finally started to talk about matters of law.
And that went on and on and on. (by that time I had become a zombie – “no kill like overkill” was written several times on my notes.)
Anyhow, a couple hours later I noticed that Larry McMahon, attorney for the Board of Commissioners, was going to begin his argument. Mr. McMahon began his rebuttal by citing the standards for recusal. Simply put, the Court must find 1) evidence that objectively shows that the court could not be impartial and 2) does the evidence show that Judge Ervin would be biased? McMahon easily defeated the “evidence” provided by the BOE. It did not help the BOE that so much of the evidence presented by way of Ms. Norman’s affidavit was false, and that some due diligence by the BOE attorneys could have avoided its presentation. Mr. McMahon concluded that the BOE had presented no evidence that Judge Ervin would be shaped by the publicity or any other matter regarding the public controversy.
Judge F. Donald Bridges who heard the case quickly picked up on the “irregularities” in the affidavit. (Mr. Schwartz indicated that those irregularities were by no means intentional, but were an oversight.)
Judge Bridges made several points in his ruling:
In an answer to Mr. Schwartz opinion that Judge Ervin had acted irresponsibly by forcing this hearing, Judge Bridges explained that Judge Ervin did what he was supposed to do. He referred the case to another judge to make a determination.
Judge Bridges hoped that the folks in Burke realized how fortunate they are to have Judge Ervin.
Judge Bridges opined that his order would be detrimental to the school students of Burke County.
Judge Bridges said that parties should not be given liberty to judge-shop by unfounded allegations.
Judge Bridges had no doubt that Judge Ervin would be impartial in this case, but that to avoid even the hint of impropriety, he ordered that the Judge Ervin would be recused from the case and that the case would be heard by such Judge as determined by the Chief Justice of the NC Supreme Court.
Which, as Fate would have it, happens to be Judge F. Donald Bridges.
I attended the hearing regarding the Motion to Recuse Judge Robert Ervin from adjudicating the case. The pleadings in that case were a puzzlement. There were blatant misstatements of fact in the Motion, and there were blatant misstatements of fact in Ms. Norman’s affidavit. In my limited experience with expensive, “Big City” lawyers, one gets what one pays for – in other words – top notch attorneys and top notch product. In this case, however, it appeared to me that the BOE was relying on a firm that couldn’t even verify verifiable facts, and had no problem submitting the Motion pleadings and Ms. Norman’s inaccurate affidavit as evidence.
Anyway, Mr. Schwartz began arguing the motion by telling the judge that this case was more contentious than any other that he had ever been involved. Mr. Schwartz should know – he has been involved in many controversial cases. Here is one – this is from August 28, 2008 “News Argus” regarding a suit by the Duplin County BOE against the Duplin County Commissioners:
Schwartz asked potential jurors if they would be bothered by the school board asking for “tens of millions of dollars” in settlement from the county. They also were questioned as to whether they had been asked to sign any petitions. Several petitions are circulating in the county including ones asking for a state investigation of the school board and for the job of schools Supt. Dr. Wiley Doby.
And this from Atlanta Journal Constitution March, 2008 regarding Clayton County, Ga.:
But I digress.Police had to intervene twice Saturday to control an unruly Clayton school board meeting where the board unanimously approved a contract granting Thompson a $285,000 annual salary and $2,000 monthly housing stipend. But on Saturday, Thompson's attorney, Richard Schwartz, said the candidate did not withdraw, but just stopped talking to Clayton. School district attorney Hopson also said Thompson did not withdraw.
Mr. Schwartz went on. And on. And on. He told the judge he had litigated these kinds of matters all over the state. He read aloud in court an article written in the Morganton News Herald about a rally for David Burleson held in March. He submitted comments by bloggers who criticized the board majority’s stance on issues. He referred to Judge Ervin’s former law firm and their pro bono representation of tax payers who had filed suit to enjoin the termination of former Superintendent Burleson. He told the judge that at the June 30th board meeting, in the presence of 250 people, some members of the public had destroyed some board member’s name plates. (I was at that board meeting. I did not see any name plates destroyed. I did see that someone had moved them around to different seats – but no destruction. Apparently he means a different board meeting?) Over and over again Schwartz complained that Judge Ervin had not voluntarily recused himself from the case, and that failure had put the BOE’s case in jeopardy – because they had to reveal their strategy at this hearing. Then he finally started to talk about matters of law.
And that went on and on and on. (by that time I had become a zombie – “no kill like overkill” was written several times on my notes.)
Anyhow, a couple hours later I noticed that Larry McMahon, attorney for the Board of Commissioners, was going to begin his argument. Mr. McMahon began his rebuttal by citing the standards for recusal. Simply put, the Court must find 1) evidence that objectively shows that the court could not be impartial and 2) does the evidence show that Judge Ervin would be biased? McMahon easily defeated the “evidence” provided by the BOE. It did not help the BOE that so much of the evidence presented by way of Ms. Norman’s affidavit was false, and that some due diligence by the BOE attorneys could have avoided its presentation. Mr. McMahon concluded that the BOE had presented no evidence that Judge Ervin would be shaped by the publicity or any other matter regarding the public controversy.
Judge F. Donald Bridges who heard the case quickly picked up on the “irregularities” in the affidavit. (Mr. Schwartz indicated that those irregularities were by no means intentional, but were an oversight.)
Judge Bridges made several points in his ruling:
In an answer to Mr. Schwartz opinion that Judge Ervin had acted irresponsibly by forcing this hearing, Judge Bridges explained that Judge Ervin did what he was supposed to do. He referred the case to another judge to make a determination.
Judge Bridges hoped that the folks in Burke realized how fortunate they are to have Judge Ervin.
Judge Bridges opined that his order would be detrimental to the school students of Burke County.
Judge Bridges said that parties should not be given liberty to judge-shop by unfounded allegations.
Judge Bridges had no doubt that Judge Ervin would be impartial in this case, but that to avoid even the hint of impropriety, he ordered that the Judge Ervin would be recused from the case and that the case would be heard by such Judge as determined by the Chief Justice of the NC Supreme Court.
Which, as Fate would have it, happens to be Judge F. Donald Bridges.
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Money Well Spent?
The beginning of school next week leads me to reminisce about my own experience attending Burke schools. I spent the bulk of my elementary years at Mountain View Elementary. I rode the bus.
People older than me like to talk about walking ten miles each way to school. My bus stop was right in front of my house. Even so, I missed the bus a lot. Maybe it was my passive aggressive way of protest – back in the ‘day,’ school buses were driven by teenagers and were “hell on wheels.” Lots of screaming, meanness and disorder on that bus. And if I missed the bus my mother had to drive me. (Doesn’t sound like I was a very nice kid.) ANYWAY, that is how I remember my experience riding the bus to Mountain View.
So now, due to “Cost Savings Initiatives,” the BCPS buses will not travel down roads less than one mile. That sounds alright – everyone could use a bit more exercise. Until you realize that some buses run earlier than 6:00 am (darkness), and that kids will most likely have to walk to the bus stop alone. And then there is the problem of students encountering strangers. Recent news reports in the Charlotte Observer about a bus stop being near the home of a sex offender bring to mind the vulnerability of a child standing in the dark a mile away from home.
This is the website to check if you are concerned about your child’s bus stop: http://sexoffender.ncdoj.gov/
This Cost Saving Initiative will save BCPS gas/diesel money. (I can’t readily find the amount of money saved – although I bet some of you readers can). It seems to me the BOE has recently accrued unjustified legal expenses - the amount of those expenses is not readily available either.
Priorities?
People older than me like to talk about walking ten miles each way to school. My bus stop was right in front of my house. Even so, I missed the bus a lot. Maybe it was my passive aggressive way of protest – back in the ‘day,’ school buses were driven by teenagers and were “hell on wheels.” Lots of screaming, meanness and disorder on that bus. And if I missed the bus my mother had to drive me. (Doesn’t sound like I was a very nice kid.) ANYWAY, that is how I remember my experience riding the bus to Mountain View.
So now, due to “Cost Savings Initiatives,” the BCPS buses will not travel down roads less than one mile. That sounds alright – everyone could use a bit more exercise. Until you realize that some buses run earlier than 6:00 am (darkness), and that kids will most likely have to walk to the bus stop alone. And then there is the problem of students encountering strangers. Recent news reports in the Charlotte Observer about a bus stop being near the home of a sex offender bring to mind the vulnerability of a child standing in the dark a mile away from home.
This is the website to check if you are concerned about your child’s bus stop: http://sexoffender.ncdoj.gov/
This Cost Saving Initiative will save BCPS gas/diesel money. (I can’t readily find the amount of money saved – although I bet some of you readers can). It seems to me the BOE has recently accrued unjustified legal expenses - the amount of those expenses is not readily available either.
Priorities?
FROM THE BCPS WEBSITE
Regarding Superintendent Search:
Board of Education Seeks Input in Superintendent Search
The Board of Education is in the process of selecting a superintendent for Burke County Public Schools. To that end, we are sending letters soliciting public input from community leaders, as well as seeking input from our staff. Parents, students, and members of the community are also invited to participate in an anonymous online survey to help with this process. Please submit your responses by September 1, 2009.
The results of the survey will be reviewed by the Board of Education and then shared with the final candidate.
Forgive me for being so literal, but does this mean they pick the final candidate AND THEN tell him/her what the community wants?
That seems counter-intuitive to me.
How about "The Board will review the results of the survey and will use those results to guide them in choosing a new superintendent." (OK, I admit I am a little picky,)
Below are some of the questions on the form from Survey Monkey - the possible choices are "Most important", "Very Important" "Important" and "Less Important" and "Least Important":
Communicates well with all community groups.
Has strong human relations or "people" skills.
Understands research-based school programs.
Supports the use and development of technology in teaching and learning.
Is willing to take new approaches to teaching and learning.
Understands school finance, budgets and business management.
Knows how to get staff, students, parents and community to work together to help children learn.
Understands how to, and is able to effectively delegate authority.
Has experience with building, maintaining and managing schools.
Has been an effective classroom teacher.
Has been a successful principal.
Has been a successful assistant or associate superintendent.
Has been a successful superintendent.
Has worked in North Carolina public education.
Should have high visibility in our schools.
Board of Education Seeks Input in Superintendent Search
The Board of Education is in the process of selecting a superintendent for Burke County Public Schools. To that end, we are sending letters soliciting public input from community leaders, as well as seeking input from our staff. Parents, students, and members of the community are also invited to participate in an anonymous online survey to help with this process. Please submit your responses by September 1, 2009.
The results of the survey will be reviewed by the Board of Education and then shared with the final candidate.
Forgive me for being so literal, but does this mean they pick the final candidate AND THEN tell him/her what the community wants?
That seems counter-intuitive to me.
How about "The Board will review the results of the survey and will use those results to guide them in choosing a new superintendent." (OK, I admit I am a little picky,)
Below are some of the questions on the form from Survey Monkey - the possible choices are "Most important", "Very Important" "Important" and "Less Important" and "Least Important":
Communicates well with all community groups.
Has strong human relations or "people" skills.
Understands research-based school programs.
Supports the use and development of technology in teaching and learning.
Is willing to take new approaches to teaching and learning.
Understands school finance, budgets and business management.
Knows how to get staff, students, parents and community to work together to help children learn.
Understands how to, and is able to effectively delegate authority.
Has experience with building, maintaining and managing schools.
Has been an effective classroom teacher.
Has been a successful principal.
Has been a successful assistant or associate superintendent.
Has been a successful superintendent.
Has worked in North Carolina public education.
Should have high visibility in our schools.
In the interest of avoiding copyright infringement, I have not provided all of the questions. In my opinion, the first 15 questions on the survey itself are "duh" questions - many of them will be "most important" or "very important" to the majority of those surveyed.
The last questions (in bold) are the most focused and concrete.
The last question seems to be an afterthought.
If you'd like to comment about the survey and let others know what you feel is most important, please post. Again, in my opinion, the first 15 or so questions on the survey are generic, "of course the superintendent better have these qualities" questions.
If you disagree with my assessment of that, so state - I suppose I am a bit jaded and may not recognize legitimate questions there. Otherwise, let us know what qualities you really want the superintendent to have.
Potential Superintendents: Burke County is a wonderful place to live. The community has never been so energized and united over the opposition to the current school board, and many of us fear that the shenanigans perpetrated by them will not end soon.
Please understand that we are good people who will treat with respect those who treat us with respect, and we will value a superintendent who values children and staff and who will not succomb to the will of unethical board members.
Fellow citizens: please complete the survey!
Thanks -
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Practical Answers about Accreditation
(Thank you Kim Smith)
Anonymous said...
Can I change the subject for a minute? I know this may be old news to some, but I am having a hard time getting solid information on the ramifications of losing accreditation. I contacted a couple of state schools (Carolina and State) and they assured me that losing accreditation would not impact admission or scholarships, but I spoke with someone at WPCC who mentioned that they have to have transcripts from an accredited school to consider the person for Pell grants. It seems that this issue is so political that is hard to find real answers. While I hope we are looking at probation, I want to know the effects of lose of accreditation so I can make informed decisions for my childrens' future. Georgia has a different system with their lottery money scholarships so I don't think we can rely entirely on what happened in Clayton County. Can anyone just give information on where to get this information without any bias?
August 17, 2009 7:24 PM
Kim Smith said...
Just completed the college search and application process with our oldest daughter and will begin searching colleges with my son (a high school junior) this year. Accreditation has been, and is, a huge concern at our home. I'll try to respond from a practical standpoint based on my experiences so far. What I've seen is that accreditation is required for application for some colleges and not at others. It varies. Some scholarships (especially governmental/military ones) require graduation from accredited high schools. Some scholarships don't require graduation from an accredited high school. Just like the schools, it varies. There's really no "bias", there is just discrepancy in what is required. If your children are young, don't panic...work as hard as you can to get a change in the BOE majority in November. If you have a child that is a rising junior or senior in high school, contact the colleges in which your child is interested, tell them the situation, and ask them what they would do if they were you. Make your decisions based on that. Then, work hard to change the BOE majority in November.
So, there is nothing "political" about this except that the behavior of the current board majority is what put us in this situation. Only a change in their behavior (I'm not betting on that!), or a change in the board majority will get us back on the right path. The good thing is that the reason accreditation is at risk at all has NOTHING to do with academics. As long as we get a change in the BOE BEFORE it begins having an impact on academics, we can turn this around. I will be helping as much as possible to encourage voter turnout and support SWAT in November. If a change in the BOE majority does not happen in the November election, we do not expect BCPS to keep accreditation or to re-gain it. As a result, we will likely transfer our children to an accredited school system in order not to limit their college choices.
August 17, 2009 10:47 PM
Anonymous said...
Can I change the subject for a minute? I know this may be old news to some, but I am having a hard time getting solid information on the ramifications of losing accreditation. I contacted a couple of state schools (Carolina and State) and they assured me that losing accreditation would not impact admission or scholarships, but I spoke with someone at WPCC who mentioned that they have to have transcripts from an accredited school to consider the person for Pell grants. It seems that this issue is so political that is hard to find real answers. While I hope we are looking at probation, I want to know the effects of lose of accreditation so I can make informed decisions for my childrens' future. Georgia has a different system with their lottery money scholarships so I don't think we can rely entirely on what happened in Clayton County. Can anyone just give information on where to get this information without any bias?
August 17, 2009 7:24 PM
Kim Smith said...
Just completed the college search and application process with our oldest daughter and will begin searching colleges with my son (a high school junior) this year. Accreditation has been, and is, a huge concern at our home. I'll try to respond from a practical standpoint based on my experiences so far. What I've seen is that accreditation is required for application for some colleges and not at others. It varies. Some scholarships (especially governmental/military ones) require graduation from accredited high schools. Some scholarships don't require graduation from an accredited high school. Just like the schools, it varies. There's really no "bias", there is just discrepancy in what is required. If your children are young, don't panic...work as hard as you can to get a change in the BOE majority in November. If you have a child that is a rising junior or senior in high school, contact the colleges in which your child is interested, tell them the situation, and ask them what they would do if they were you. Make your decisions based on that. Then, work hard to change the BOE majority in November.
So, there is nothing "political" about this except that the behavior of the current board majority is what put us in this situation. Only a change in their behavior (I'm not betting on that!), or a change in the board majority will get us back on the right path. The good thing is that the reason accreditation is at risk at all has NOTHING to do with academics. As long as we get a change in the BOE BEFORE it begins having an impact on academics, we can turn this around. I will be helping as much as possible to encourage voter turnout and support SWAT in November. If a change in the BOE majority does not happen in the November election, we do not expect BCPS to keep accreditation or to re-gain it. As a result, we will likely transfer our children to an accredited school system in order not to limit their college choices.
August 17, 2009 10:47 PM
Continuing to Seek Answers -
Anonymous said...
Mr Sherrill and Mr Hairfield were seen entering to Jim Richardson's home last week during the workday and leaving well over an hour later. More than 1 person saw this occur, and it is not the first time the three have been seen meeting there. Certainly an interesting piece of information. Any thoughts?
August 16, 2009 1:04 AM
Catherine,
I had a conversation with my friend and neighbor, Jim Richardson. Jim asked me about an entry on the blog about his applying for, and possibly becoming the Burke County Superintendent of Schools. Jim said he supported David Burleson and interceded with Mr. Hairfield on David's behalf.
Mr. Sherrill, whom Jim did not know, called Jim to inquire about successful programs Jim had formulated to retain college students. Having served on my Alma Mater's Board of Trustees, I am quite familiar with the dropout rate of college students. The dropout rate of high school students pales when compared to the "non-returning" student population in colleges and universities. Colleges and universities suffer a huge monetary loss when students drop out. They have not only a moral obligation but a survival mentality concerning programs to keep students in their institutions of higher learning.
Jim invited Mr. Sherrill and Mr. Hairfield to his home to discuss initiatives referred to above. Jim pointed out that he does have a PhD. from Duke. He does not have a Superintendents' license and would suffer a financial penalty if he would take any Superintendent position. Jim said he has no interest in any Superintendent position.
Ed Redman
Mr Sherrill and Mr Hairfield were seen entering to Jim Richardson's home last week during the workday and leaving well over an hour later. More than 1 person saw this occur, and it is not the first time the three have been seen meeting there. Certainly an interesting piece of information. Any thoughts?
August 16, 2009 1:04 AM
Catherine,
I had a conversation with my friend and neighbor, Jim Richardson. Jim asked me about an entry on the blog about his applying for, and possibly becoming the Burke County Superintendent of Schools. Jim said he supported David Burleson and interceded with Mr. Hairfield on David's behalf.
Mr. Sherrill, whom Jim did not know, called Jim to inquire about successful programs Jim had formulated to retain college students. Having served on my Alma Mater's Board of Trustees, I am quite familiar with the dropout rate of college students. The dropout rate of high school students pales when compared to the "non-returning" student population in colleges and universities. Colleges and universities suffer a huge monetary loss when students drop out. They have not only a moral obligation but a survival mentality concerning programs to keep students in their institutions of higher learning.
Jim invited Mr. Sherrill and Mr. Hairfield to his home to discuss initiatives referred to above. Jim pointed out that he does have a PhD. from Duke. He does not have a Superintendents' license and would suffer a financial penalty if he would take any Superintendent position. Jim said he has no interest in any Superintendent position.
Ed Redman
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Superintendent Search
The other day Susan, Sam, Buddy and I (Stroup, Wilkinson, Armour and Thomas) met with some concerned citizens about the impending appointment of a new superintendent for Burke County Public Schools. While none of us are aware who has actually applied for that position, we all agree that it would not be in the best interest of the school system or the students for the Board of Education to appoint a superintendent of schools before the election of new board members in November. That said, we also acknowledge that the current BOE majority will probably appoint a superintendent in the coming weeks.
At the May 26, 2009 board meeting, Mr. Schwartz (of the Raleigh firm Schwartz and Shaw) described the process of selecting a new superintendent. He remarked that superintendent searches usually lasted at least 6 months, but acknowledged the board majority’s desire to cut that time in half.
The “search” began June 2, 2009 and a new superintendent was to be announced August 17, 2009 – 76 days. However, due to the "resolution" of Mr. Burleson's contract (and probably because no applications had been received?) the search was extended to September 23.
These are the issues that concern the four of us as candidates, citizens of Burke and parents/grandparents of school students:
The most important job of the school board is to select the superintendent of the schools.
See the following from the November 2007 “Leadership Insider” published by the National School Board Association:
"For most school boards, no single decision is more critical than the hiring of a new superintendent for the school district. The importance of this ultimate exercise in delegation has only increased as the governance role of school boards has continued to shift to one primarily of direction-setting and oversight."
The same publication “stresses the need for communication with the public during the hiring process. Where criticism has been leveled against school boards over superintendent hiring, it often does seem to come back to a question of communications.”
We have seen examples of boards of education that at least make an attempt to allow public and school principals to evaluate the final candidates for the job. Susan sent me the following late last night, describing the superintendent search in another location:
“The board has invited the two finalists to visit for a day of interviews and meetings. They will visit schools, meet with the School Board and the district’s leadership team, and also meet with an invited group of representatives from a wide array of community organizations. The Board will then conduct site visits to the districts where the candidates are currently employed. As planned, the Board is on track to complete the hiring process and name a new Superintendent before the end of April.”
The search referred to above was to conclude at the end of April – it started November 6 (just about 6 months).
Our call to the current board majority is to allow the proper amount of time to find a capable superintendent and to make that search as transparent as possible – and to involve the community and school employees in that decision at the appropriate time.
At the May 26, 2009 board meeting, Mr. Schwartz (of the Raleigh firm Schwartz and Shaw) described the process of selecting a new superintendent. He remarked that superintendent searches usually lasted at least 6 months, but acknowledged the board majority’s desire to cut that time in half.
The “search” began June 2, 2009 and a new superintendent was to be announced August 17, 2009 – 76 days. However, due to the "resolution" of Mr. Burleson's contract (and probably because no applications had been received?) the search was extended to September 23.
These are the issues that concern the four of us as candidates, citizens of Burke and parents/grandparents of school students:
The most important job of the school board is to select the superintendent of the schools.
See the following from the November 2007 “Leadership Insider” published by the National School Board Association:
"For most school boards, no single decision is more critical than the hiring of a new superintendent for the school district. The importance of this ultimate exercise in delegation has only increased as the governance role of school boards has continued to shift to one primarily of direction-setting and oversight."
The same publication “stresses the need for communication with the public during the hiring process. Where criticism has been leveled against school boards over superintendent hiring, it often does seem to come back to a question of communications.”
We have seen examples of boards of education that at least make an attempt to allow public and school principals to evaluate the final candidates for the job. Susan sent me the following late last night, describing the superintendent search in another location:
“The board has invited the two finalists to visit for a day of interviews and meetings. They will visit schools, meet with the School Board and the district’s leadership team, and also meet with an invited group of representatives from a wide array of community organizations. The Board will then conduct site visits to the districts where the candidates are currently employed. As planned, the Board is on track to complete the hiring process and name a new Superintendent before the end of April.”
The search referred to above was to conclude at the end of April – it started November 6 (just about 6 months).
Our call to the current board majority is to allow the proper amount of time to find a capable superintendent and to make that search as transparent as possible – and to involve the community and school employees in that decision at the appropriate time.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Adsense
It has been suggested more than a couple of times that I add advertisements to my blog, and donate the proceeds to the schools. I think ads are really annoying, but the thought of making money for the schools in this economy is tempting.
And after seeing the number of clicks on my blog after it was featured in MNH and at the School Board meeting lat night, I am thinking there is money to be made.
What do you think?
PS -
Regarding the possibility of me hacking into the BOC computer system: I am sure the MIS Manager at work is falling out of his chair horselaughing the thought of that. I can't even seem to plug in a computer without help much less remotely penetrate the secure school system computers.
And after seeing the number of clicks on my blog after it was featured in MNH and at the School Board meeting lat night, I am thinking there is money to be made.
What do you think?
PS -
Regarding the possibility of me hacking into the BOC computer system: I am sure the MIS Manager at work is falling out of his chair horselaughing the thought of that. I can't even seem to plug in a computer without help much less remotely penetrate the secure school system computers.
The Truth:
I was provided the information posted on my blog under “Just Stop Talking” without any prohibition or warning against re-publishing that information. Further, there was no “confidentiality statement” attached to the language.
I will not assist the BOE in yet another witch hunt to divert the public’s attention from the issues at hand.
I will not assist the BOE in yet another witch hunt to divert the public’s attention from the issues at hand.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Vocational Education in High Schools
If you haven’t noticed, I like to get as much info as possible to be able to discuss a subject or ask questions about a subject with some understanding. Sometimes (like this time) I think I understand a subject but am quickly told that I don’t see the big picture.
If you have been reading the comments section of my last post, you’ll see some good points made about the lack of Vocational Education available to Burke County students.
This weekend I had the opportunity to discuss the problem with a long- time vocational teacher in the public schools. He agreed that Burke County could use several upgrades to its vocational program, and cited the stumbling blocks along the path to changing the system. One is that students still have to meet the NC Core Requirements for graduation and the other is funding. He agreed that it seems that one has to be labeled an “EC” student to be able to enroll in those courses.
We discussed the possibility of “getting around” those graduation requirements – if that was possible. He mentioned some counties that had “Technical Centers,” and thought I should look into that.
So, I went to the Lincoln County Technical School website: http://qp.lincoln.k12.nc.us/QuickPlace/lcst/Main.nsf/h_Toc/3d3d8e4179f5ed5c85256ee9002318a1/?OpenDocument
And looked at the courses there versus the courses offered in the Burke County High School Course Offerings here:
http://www.burke.k12.nc.us/Curriculum/HS%20Course%20Offerings%20Booklet%202009-2010-BCPS.pdf
So, in the near future I plan on getting in touch with the folks in charge of curriculum in Lincoln County or any of the other counties that offer separate “Technical Centers.” I hope to discuss this with some high school principals as well.
And, here is where you might be able to help me:
If you have any experience or knowledge about how North Carolina counties (or “Local Education Agencies”) are handling this, please let me know. Although at some level this might be a “union state/non-union state” issue (maybe schools get funding from unions?), right now I am more interested in personal experiences and actual knowledge about what can be done in NC. Remember, we are limited by the NC Curriculum and by funding issues.
This will be an on-going project, and I am grateful for any information that you can provide.
If you have been reading the comments section of my last post, you’ll see some good points made about the lack of Vocational Education available to Burke County students.
This weekend I had the opportunity to discuss the problem with a long- time vocational teacher in the public schools. He agreed that Burke County could use several upgrades to its vocational program, and cited the stumbling blocks along the path to changing the system. One is that students still have to meet the NC Core Requirements for graduation and the other is funding. He agreed that it seems that one has to be labeled an “EC” student to be able to enroll in those courses.
We discussed the possibility of “getting around” those graduation requirements – if that was possible. He mentioned some counties that had “Technical Centers,” and thought I should look into that.
So, I went to the Lincoln County Technical School website: http://qp.lincoln.k12.nc.us/QuickPlace/lcst/Main.nsf/h_Toc/3d3d8e4179f5ed5c85256ee9002318a1/?OpenDocument
And looked at the courses there versus the courses offered in the Burke County High School Course Offerings here:
http://www.burke.k12.nc.us/Curriculum/HS%20Course%20Offerings%20Booklet%202009-2010-BCPS.pdf
So, in the near future I plan on getting in touch with the folks in charge of curriculum in Lincoln County or any of the other counties that offer separate “Technical Centers.” I hope to discuss this with some high school principals as well.
And, here is where you might be able to help me:
If you have any experience or knowledge about how North Carolina counties (or “Local Education Agencies”) are handling this, please let me know. Although at some level this might be a “union state/non-union state” issue (maybe schools get funding from unions?), right now I am more interested in personal experiences and actual knowledge about what can be done in NC. Remember, we are limited by the NC Curriculum and by funding issues.
This will be an on-going project, and I am grateful for any information that you can provide.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Public Assistance
One of the things that we citizens in Burke County have learned over the past year is that we are capable of joining together in the spirit of aiding our children and our school employees. The board majority affectionately calls this phenomenon that they created “the Mob,” and there are many shining stars that have emerged from the throes of people called to action in this struggle.
If we are fortunate enough to win a majority of seats on the school board, I think it is imperative that we include citizens in advisory roles for the school system. There is too much talent in this county not to use it!
It will take years to reverse the damage that the board majority has inflicted on the schools and we will need assistance and support from the public to make things right again.
One of the ways I would like to see the public involved is the formation of Citizen Advisory Committees. Below are some of the areas that could benefit from public participation:
Committee on Elimination of the Achievement Gap
Special Education (Exceptional Children) Committee
Advisory Council on School Facilities
If we are fortunate enough to win a majority of seats on the school board, I think it is imperative that we include citizens in advisory roles for the school system. There is too much talent in this county not to use it!
It will take years to reverse the damage that the board majority has inflicted on the schools and we will need assistance and support from the public to make things right again.
One of the ways I would like to see the public involved is the formation of Citizen Advisory Committees. Below are some of the areas that could benefit from public participation:
Committee on Elimination of the Achievement Gap
Special Education (Exceptional Children) Committee
Advisory Council on School Facilities
Council on Arts Education in the Schools
School Sports Advisory Council
These would not be oversight committees. I see these groups as opportunities to brainstorm with the administrators and teachers as to how to improve different areas, or problem-solving groups that can assist administrators and teachers in finding solutions to whatever issues that may arise.
Once the election is over, we cannot lose our focus. We must continue to aid the school system and its employees.
As I wrote above, we have so much talent in Burke, we must use it!!!!
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Half-truths and Innuendos
I have read on the blogs and in the comments that “the new board” will “take care of this situation” if Mr. Sain is not somehow reprimanded or terminated for this particular lapse in judgment.
Let me be clear: this is a decision for the acting Superintendent and personnel – and the sitting board.
If we are fortunate enough to be able to win the board majority in this upcoming election, we will act only when appropriate and will follow statutory law. If the “then acting-superintendent” recommends an action, we will consider it and vote on it. We will not seek to “hunt down” and intimidate those who do not agree with any or all of us.
We will not stoop to the level of the current majority and lower the boom on those who disagree with us. There will not be a list of people/employees with whom to get even. Retaliation is not part of the game plan.
JUST STOP TALKING . . .
Dear SACS CASI Review Committee Members,
My name is Randy Sain. I am principal at East Burke Middle School and husband of school board member Karen Sain. I, along with my fellow middle school and high school principals, was interviewed by you today at 9:45 AM in the Curriculum Lab in Morganton. I would like to explain my actions and dispel any half-truths or innuendos you may have heard.
We were told a week or so ago that SACS CASI was coming and we were to be there at 9:45. We were given no other indication of what to expect or what the tenor or tone of the questioning would be. I didn’t know if it would be accusatory or truly a fact-finding venture and we were never told that we could not record the meeting. I brought my digital recorder with me to the meeting and, as soon as I sat down at my seat, placed it out in open sight and turned it on. I never tried to hide it or be secretive about it. We sat for a couple of minutes before the moderator began the meeting. He introduced the committee members and then made the statement that he did not want to know our names, that we would remain anonymous and that anything said in the meeting was to remain in strictest confidence. Immediately, I turned the recorder OFF and placed it on top of my portfolio. No questions asked or responses given were recorded at all. In retrospect, I should have put it back in my pocket but I just didn’t think about it. I understand that one of my colleagues can attest to the fact that I stopped the recorder but I didn’t pay attention to who saw me do what at the time.
After the meeting concluded, I put the recorder back in my pocket and left. On my way back to school, I received a call from a colleague in the meeting asking if I had had a recorder in the meeting. I confirmed that I had but that it had only recorded for a couple of minutes until the moderator had said that the meeting was to be confidential and anonymous so I had stopped recording. I was driving and couldn’t get it out of my pocket to look at the length of the recording but, as soon as I got back in the building, I looked and saw that I had recorded for 3:02. I immediately deleted the recording and e-mailed my colleagues.
I apologize for the inconvenience this has caused both you and them. I did nothing maliciously or with the intent to limit anyone’s free speech. My rationale was simply to prevent any of us from being misquoted, misunderstood or maligned on the blog. Had we been asked NOT to bring a recording device, I never would have done so, regardless of whether our statements got to the blog or not. I would like to bring to your attention the fact that many who were not in the meeting are aware of this incident. This spread of what should have been a confidential incident is exactly what the school board AND administration has been dealing with for the past year. Again, I apologize to you folks for the inconvenience my action caused. I will also apologize to my colleagues for the same reason.
Sincerely,
Randy K. Sain
(emphasis and paragraph breaks added)
The opinions expressed by the group of principals were supposed to be confidential.
Bringing a visible tape recorder to the meeting implies intimidation of others at the very least.
My name is Randy Sain. I am principal at East Burke Middle School and husband of school board member Karen Sain. I, along with my fellow middle school and high school principals, was interviewed by you today at 9:45 AM in the Curriculum Lab in Morganton. I would like to explain my actions and dispel any half-truths or innuendos you may have heard.
We were told a week or so ago that SACS CASI was coming and we were to be there at 9:45. We were given no other indication of what to expect or what the tenor or tone of the questioning would be. I didn’t know if it would be accusatory or truly a fact-finding venture and we were never told that we could not record the meeting. I brought my digital recorder with me to the meeting and, as soon as I sat down at my seat, placed it out in open sight and turned it on. I never tried to hide it or be secretive about it. We sat for a couple of minutes before the moderator began the meeting. He introduced the committee members and then made the statement that he did not want to know our names, that we would remain anonymous and that anything said in the meeting was to remain in strictest confidence. Immediately, I turned the recorder OFF and placed it on top of my portfolio. No questions asked or responses given were recorded at all. In retrospect, I should have put it back in my pocket but I just didn’t think about it. I understand that one of my colleagues can attest to the fact that I stopped the recorder but I didn’t pay attention to who saw me do what at the time.
After the meeting concluded, I put the recorder back in my pocket and left. On my way back to school, I received a call from a colleague in the meeting asking if I had had a recorder in the meeting. I confirmed that I had but that it had only recorded for a couple of minutes until the moderator had said that the meeting was to be confidential and anonymous so I had stopped recording. I was driving and couldn’t get it out of my pocket to look at the length of the recording but, as soon as I got back in the building, I looked and saw that I had recorded for 3:02. I immediately deleted the recording and e-mailed my colleagues.
I apologize for the inconvenience this has caused both you and them. I did nothing maliciously or with the intent to limit anyone’s free speech. My rationale was simply to prevent any of us from being misquoted, misunderstood or maligned on the blog. Had we been asked NOT to bring a recording device, I never would have done so, regardless of whether our statements got to the blog or not. I would like to bring to your attention the fact that many who were not in the meeting are aware of this incident. This spread of what should have been a confidential incident is exactly what the school board AND administration has been dealing with for the past year. Again, I apologize to you folks for the inconvenience my action caused. I will also apologize to my colleagues for the same reason.
Sincerely,
Randy K. Sain
(emphasis and paragraph breaks added)
The opinions expressed by the group of principals were supposed to be confidential.
Bringing a visible tape recorder to the meeting implies intimidation of others at the very least.
Monday, August 3, 2009
Same Old, Same Old?
So SACS is meeting with groups of folks to identify issues and explore the charges against the school board. One of those groups was a group of principals. One principal noticed another fiddling with a tape recorder in his pocket, and asked that principal what he was doing.
Mind you, the discussions that SACS has with folks are confidential, so as to elicit truthful responses and to minimize retaliation from the school board. Why Mr. Randy Sain (husband of school board member Karen Britain Sain) was even part of that meeting is beyond me.
From: Sain, Randy K
Sent: Mon day, August 03, 2009 11:17 AM
To: All High School Principals; All Middle School Principals; Holden, Michael Alan
Subject: SACS meeting
Hi folks,I want to clarify something I did today at our meeting and allay any fears you may have. I brought my digital recorder into the meeting to record it. I had no idea of the tenor or focus of the questioning and brought it merely to have a record in case anything we said was misconstrued (in other words - CYA). I turned it on as quickly as I sat down. It was recording when the moderator started telling us the responsibilities of the review comm. and that everything said was to be anonymous and in strictest confidence. At that point, I stopped recording. It had recorded for 3:02 before I cut it off and none of the questions they asked were recorded. In retrospect, I should have put it back in my pocket after cutting it off but I just didn’t think about it. I have already erased the recording. I apologize if my action kept anyone from speaking their mind. That was certainly NOT my intent.
How many other confidential group meetings have been surreptitiously recorded?
Unfortunately for Mr. Sain, unwise move or not - we all know what this looks like: business as usual for the board majority.
Mind you, the discussions that SACS has with folks are confidential, so as to elicit truthful responses and to minimize retaliation from the school board. Why Mr. Randy Sain (husband of school board member Karen Britain Sain) was even part of that meeting is beyond me.
From: Sain, Randy K
Sent: Mon day, August 03, 2009 11:17 AM
To: All High School Principals; All Middle School Principals; Holden, Michael Alan
Subject: SACS meeting
Hi folks,I want to clarify something I did today at our meeting and allay any fears you may have. I brought my digital recorder into the meeting to record it. I had no idea of the tenor or focus of the questioning and brought it merely to have a record in case anything we said was misconstrued (in other words - CYA). I turned it on as quickly as I sat down. It was recording when the moderator started telling us the responsibilities of the review comm. and that everything said was to be anonymous and in strictest confidence. At that point, I stopped recording. It had recorded for 3:02 before I cut it off and none of the questions they asked were recorded. In retrospect, I should have put it back in my pocket after cutting it off but I just didn’t think about it. I have already erased the recording. I apologize if my action kept anyone from speaking their mind. That was certainly NOT my intent.
How many other confidential group meetings have been surreptitiously recorded?
Unfortunately for Mr. Sain, unwise move or not - we all know what this looks like: business as usual for the board majority.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
