Dear Brick Wall 399,
I just left the 11 AM impromptu closed session/teleconference Special Board Meeting of April 9, 2009 Thursday. I am writing my impressions immediately and plan to email it this evening.
The Special Meeting time/date was posted on board docs to notify the public. (24 hours and 1 minute ago is what I understand the rules to be)
(I am sending in my impressions of that meeting so any errors in this letter are mine alone).
Trustees: Ricasa, Sandoval & Lopez were on their respective phone lines at addresses listed in Bonita & Chula Vista. Dr. Gandara, superintendent was present in the room, along with Rita Beyers, one of the three labor negotiators listed. Cartmill & Quinones did not seem to be present but the phone connection was garbled and difficult to understand.
Members of the public present included: Our union president, Sam Lucero, three teachers (including myself: MVH librarian), one district office administrator, a retired administrator, a coach and a parent with family members. I would safely assume that all present were also community members and registered voters in this district.
There were 5 items to be considered in closed session:
1. Public Employee Evaluation/Appointment Transfer Title: Principal (2)
2. Public Employee Discipline/Dismissal/Release/Reclassification/Reassignment/ Resignation/Transfer
3. Conference with Labor Negotiator
4. Conference with Legal Counsel—Existing Litigation Name of Case: SUHSD vs. All American Asphalt
5. Conference with Legal Counsel—Anticipated Litigation Number of Potential Cases: 2
Four members of the public addressed the legislative body (and by “addressing” let me add it was on the phone with the scratchy reception and we gave up on the speaker phone). We could hear “our side” of the conversation.
The first three speakers spoke to item 1 & 2 ( I believe). I hope their eloquent commentary gets on this blog or is disseminated to our community by other means. A few points they brought up:
1. The fact that in the reorganization the 11 women moved were demoted, or dismissed the five men were moved to at least equivalent positions or more.
2. The climate of fear and intimidation pervasive in the district
3. The principal reassignments of March 9: not acting in the best interests of students.
4. Reminding/requesting that no retaliation occur towards those community members & district employees voicing their concerns about board decisions.
5. Addressing the closed session vote removing Karen Janney & Dianna Carberry from the assistant superintendent positions on March 9, 2009.
The three people who spoke were women with many years of employment in our district. They were courageous and to-the-point in their allocated two minutes. Again, I hope they send in their notes to this blog, so all can read their quick and intelligent responses formulated in under a day, during spring break which, for many of us, is a spiritual week of reflection, hope and rejuvenation.
Mr. Lucero addressed the trustees and spoke to budget concerns. Again, with very short notice, he reminded the board of the federal stimulus package to arrive in April (11.1 million), asked about the missing items on the budget-cutting suggestion list, suggested the district invoke district reserves, cut district travel & conferences, cut the half million in food allowances and other points I did not get written down accurately or quickly enough. He also reminded the board that the union is asking for a status quo proposal.
After these four members of the public spoke we were excused for the closed session portion of the “special meeting.” A few of us decided to leave, assuming that this would last an hour; others hunkered down to wait. But, it seemed only 10-12 minutes elapsed before we were called back in and sitting in our chairs waiting for the crackly voice on the speaker phone to announce any decisions . I looked at my iPhone---11: 32. The only item Vice President Ricasa spoke to was Item 4—the American Asphalt lawsuit.
The special meeting was adjourned.
After a Happy Easter greeting we removed ourselves to our vehicles and returned to our reflective vacation days.
These are my recollections of the “special meeting” of April 9, 2009—one month to the day.
See you at the newly scheduled April 13 meeting .
Yours in education,
Mary Doyle
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Here are the comments that I made at the April 9th meeting:
Good morning. I am here this morning to express my concern over the appearance that the Board of Trustees is acting in a manner to avert public comment. There are members of the community who are upset and concerned over the demotion of key administrators which took place at your March meeting. Today we see another agenda item dealing with administrative demotions. At the March meeting there were 8 women all aged 50 or older demoted or terminated while on the same agenda 4 males were promoted. We will be paying attention to the personnel moves you make this morning. Two sites, for example, will apparently be assigned principals without parent and staff input as directed by your own Board Policy.
I believe that the board has not acted in the best interest of the district (especially with the demotion of Karen Janney) or the community and has instead created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. I applaud those who are willing to come forward to speak and trust that there will be no retaliation against any of them for having done so.
The board agenda for this morning lists an item that infers that there is potential litigation against the district. I sure hope so!
Mary Anne Stro, Ed.D.
Post a Comment