| Author |
Message |
    
Jim McLaughlin
Citizen
Username: Jmclaugh
Post Number: 55
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 9:21 am: | 
|
"There is plenty of work still to be done. Who should do it -- people who talk straight? Or people who think honest discussion is "polarizing"?"
How about, people who are competent, well-informed, well-prepared and who are able to recognize and willing to address the complexity of issues facing our district.
I personally find this "throw out the incumbents" posture perplexing. Gregg and David have served for only 3 years. During their short tenure they have accomplished much. In large part they have been able to do this by listening to, acknowledging, and responding to the issues raised by both supporters and critics of this administration. They deserve to be given a chance to continue. Equally perplexing is the idea the Jennifer Payne-Parrish should be given the chance to replace either David or Gregg. She has not demonstrated any of the characteristics needed to be an effective BOE member. She may be a nice person, she probably is very intelligent, she probably has had a successful career as a chemist, and I would even venture to guess that she would be able to apply these strengths to BOE matters. However, her lack of preparation at the debates, her reliance on broad generalizations and platitudes, and her seeming lack of knowledge as to what has been happening at the board level over the last few years is very troubling. She is simply not prepared to be a BOE at this time. |
Dogbert
Citizen
Username: Dogbert
Post Number: 54
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 10:03 am: |
|
The issue of who gets to pick Horoschak's successor is just an extension of the contract renewal issue. It's not dead at all. |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4175
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 10:16 am: |
|
Jim,
You wrote: "I personally find this "throw out the incumbents" posture perplexing."
I think we are experiencing the electoral equivalent of a riot in which the rioters express their rage by trashing their own community. |
Mtam
Citizen
Username: Mtam
Post Number: 79
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 10:50 am: |
|
I was able to watch the debate last night on TV. I would like to preface that I have not made up my mind yet, but am posting my personal impressions. I do think we should move on from the issue of whether "they did or didn't" signal renewal of the Superintendent's contract. Enough already. I'm interested in what they envision as we move forward.
Just from impressions: I completely disagree with the impression that Mark Gleason has not offered any concrete vision for going forward. To me, he was the candidate who most articulated the dysfunction in the district and the need to get out of a out defeatist approach. His focus is on cleaning up house administratively and managerially. He cited, specifically, that teacher turnover is one way that contributes to the achievement gap. He was vaguer on the effect of the re-organization of levels in the sixth grade. I think he knows what his strengths are and he speaks to those strengths and he comes across as someone who is willing to think outside the box.
I think that Mr. Frazer has many things to be proud of in his term as Board President, and I think some of the destructive tearing down of hard work is, well, destructive--these guys have worked hard and I don't like that being dismissed. However, I was disturbed by a general, "We're going it already, and we know what we're doing" posture that emanated throughout his responses--I found it defensive and at times closed-minded. I find Mr. Frazer extremely strong on no-nonsense management concerns-I think we are in good hands on some of the tougher decisions we have to make. However, I find him strikingly weak on curricular and academic issues. He just does not seem that well read on the latest research or information about curriculum and its role in raising standards. The work on the measurement committee, to me, has been vague. The use of "time in the district" is really not adequate--I just read an article, in fact, that talks about how one of the contributing factors to the achievement gap is how many times poor children move schools. Thus, ANY stability for a child will obviously have an effect.
I thought Mr. Betheil, as an incumbent, is far more willing to admit that the district has much further to go. From a personality point of view, I like that better in an incumbent. However, I wasn't alway sure of Mr. Betheil's more specific vision for how to move forward--he puts a lot of stock in the Strategic Plan. But as Mr. Gleason points out, it's not a plan, it's a wish list. It has yet to be a specific plan with priorities and marching orders.
I don't think you can attack a candidate for being involved or not being involved with the Strategic Plan. You look at what they do have to offer. What came across to me from Dr. Payne-Parrish is that she may have less broad depth of experience in the community, though she's been awfully active locally in her school, but what she does have is a much keener eye toward evaluation of academics. This may come from her work as owner of the Academic Resource Center. I also appreciated her response to Mr. Frazer about the leveling question when he dismissed transparency and clearer outcomes and standards as one way to tackle the issue.
I thought Mr. Eastman had many good things to say, but his presentation was often lost in a lot of professorial wind-up. I wish he'd gotten his points across more clearly, rather than getting lost in the data (as much as I admire how much he is interested in more fine-tuned study) His strongest point, to me, is when he said we have been relying too much on social solutions to the achievement gap and not the academic side.
I thought Mr. Brownlee is a charming and winning person, who clearly is more of a "people's person" and is very concerned about making sure more voices are heard. He brings those gifts to any leadership role he might play. But he was a little vague on specifics.
In sum, I'm looking to see what each of these candidates has to offer in the overall chemistry of the board, because it is, in the end, a larger dynamic--they all have to work together and bring their own strengths. I don't appreciate a bunkered, "we're doing it already" attitude when many legitimate issues have been raised. On the other hand, I do think there's a depth of experience that the incumbents have. At the same time, I feel each of the challengers have strengths that our board could sorely use more of--especially with respect to a clearer sense of academics and curriculum and a stronger vision, even given these hard budget times. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5279
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 10:54 am: |
|
Folks, when Dr. Horoschak was run out of Albuquerque, he threatened to sue the School Board President, if not the whole board, for somehow impairing his ability to do his job. I think the sitting BOE members who are candidates, made appropriate statements here.
I think it's ridiculous to do all this comparative parsing of candidates' statements regarding Dr. Horoschak. I'd rather focus on what they intend going forward |
Gregg Betheil
Citizen
Username: Greggbetheil
Post Number: 116
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 11:17 am: |
|
Gordon seems to be suggesting that either I didn't have a position on the Sup's renewal, or if I did, I was lying when I said I didn't. He also referred to my "surrogates" on this board. Let me clarify both:
1) I don't have any surrogates on this board. I speak for myself under my name. When I have something to day, I say it. Go check my initial posting some time back about my concern for the surrogate approach to MOL dialogues and my hope that an area could be set up for the candidates to have a free exchange. That hasn't happened, at least not yet (maybe that's the formatting change Dave is working on?). That said, unless Gleason, Eastman, Payne-Parrish, Frazer or Brownlee are posting under another name, I think I stand alone here. Also, to my recollection, and I could be wrong here, Brian O'Leary and Bob Little are the only other Board members to have posted on MOL in the last 3 years. One question is to ask of Board members why they haven't, another would be to ask the MOL community why it may not have been so inviting...
2) When I ran for the Board 3 years ago, some things paralleled today's situation: teachers without a contract, Super up for renewal, budget trying to balance between enough resources and limiting tax impact. At the time I said that if elected to the Board that I would consider the evaluation information on the Superintendent that only the Board sees (I wasn't yet a Board member). With that information I would consider what I thought to be the best direction for the district. I did that, and ended up voting against renewal at that time. I was joined by Mr. O'Leary in that vote. Further, after we didn't carry the day, I stated publicly, at the Board meeting, that the vote was behind us, the Board had spoken, and we needed to get back to the important business of the schools, as there was much to be done.
I could have taken an obstructionist approach, criticizing everything all the time. Some do that now. Rather, I decided to be more constructive in working collaboratively to try to move things ahead. The mistake I made in 2003 was not in my vote, but how I went about it. As I've said elsewhere, I didn't sit down with Dr. Horoschak before the vote and talk with him about my concerns. Instead, I informed him of my intention to vote against renewal as we left executive session to head into the meeting where the vote was to be cast. That was a mistake, and one I regretted. I subsequently apologized to Peter and worked to develop a relationship that would serve the district well. One where I could offer criticism or suggestions that would be welcomed on their face, rather than mistrusted because I had undermined trust earlier.
Fast forward to 2005-6. During the mid-year evaluation of the Superintendent, I went beyond the standard evaluation instrument and drafted a letter to the Board articulating the criteria I planned to use for evaluating renewal. I met with Peter to share those criteria in person. I made it clear that I had concern in some areas and that I expected to see improvement, by June, if I were to feel comfortable voting for renewal. I also said that I would withhold judgment until such time as we needed to make the decision and all of the information was in. That was my way of being clear about expectations, but also being fair to Peter and offering the opportunity to work constructively through what was to be a very difficult budget season, and the beginning of the implementation of the strategic plan.
I then posted the same criteria on my website, on MOL, and in other conversations in response to where I stood on renewal. Despite Gordon's suggestion that I must be lying, I believe I have acted consistently and fairly in my approach to this important question, in my interactions with the Board and with Peter, and in frank communications to the community.
For others to suggest that I am somehow "spinning" this, or have changed my stance to suit the political times, I simply reminded folks where I voted 3 years ago. But we've had to do a lot of work in the intervening time. There has been progress in some areas, and not in others.
Times change. That can lead to support for something I didn't support before, or a lack of support for something I supported before. That's the simple reason I think we need to consider all the information available to us at the time and stand by our votes as we make them. But we should also be open minded enough to believe that we aren't always right and new information or developments can offer us the opportunity to evolve our views.
My name's Gregg Betheil. I post under GreggBetheil. And I'm running for the Board of Education. I think the choices voters have are becoming clear. The Board is going to have a lot to DO over the next few months. Do you want talk or action? Do you want platitudes or plans? Do you want to know where the candidates stand on special education, and a host of other issues?
Above all else, vote. For if this entire political exercise yields 12% turnout, then perhaps we'll all realize that 88% of the town has stopped listening as we all go back and forth on this Board.
See you at the debate Tuesday, 7:30 at Marshall.
And, Gordon, thanks for the essay reference. It was, sincerely, a good read.
Gregg
|
Gordon Agress
Citizen
Username: Odd
Post Number: 405
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 11:40 am: |
|
"Frazer was pretty clear "
Yeah? Can you state his position in one sentence? One word?
Nohero, I agree intentions going forward are what matter. But let's know the history, so we don't repeat it. The parsing is ridiculous. But I repeat my question:
"why is it so hard to understand what a candidate was saying on what was the most important question in the campaign? Wouldn't this be easier if his comments were clear and consistent?"
I'm repeating myself. I shall now go take my OCD medication and be done with this.
|
Mtam
Citizen
Username: Mtam
Post Number: 80
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 11:57 am: |
|
Please! Can we move on from this issue? If we are going to talk about the Superintendent, it should be with respect to what we're looking at in a future leader. (albeit, a new thread is probably in order, given the title of this one) To me, the only relevance of the prior vote is the question: were the incumbents too wedded to the status quo? Did they show a lack of vision, a desire to defend rather than question and push harder? If so, do they have that vision now--not about what's been done, but what needs to be done? And do the challengers have a vision for the future? |
Gordon Agress
Citizen
Username: Odd
Post Number: 406
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 12:14 pm: |
|
Gregg, if I meant "lying" I would use the word. For what it's worth, I think your language proceeds from confusion rather than malice.
You know very well what I mean by proxies. You've a supporter here who is actively slandering an opponent, and I haven't seen any condemnation of it from you or any of your other supporters.
The medication is taking effect and I'll leave the rest alone.
|
nan
Citizen
Username: Nan
Post Number: 2391
Registered: 2-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 12:20 pm: |
|
"I find him strikingly weak on curricular and academic issues. He just does not seem that well read on the latest research or information about curriculum and its role in raising standards."
Mtam,
What do you mean by this given the fact that there is NO CONSENSUS ON CURRICULAR OR ACADEMIC ISSUES. The idea that there is "research" proving THE WAY to "raise standards" is simply simplistic and false.
I've found David Frazer to be well acquainted with complex curriculum issues. He’s a voracious reader, consuming books and articles on topcis such as "The Reading War" (both sides), The Achievement Gap, and school reform. He listens to everyone in the community (including those I wish he would not) and tries to find the best solution for the given situation, not just plug in the latest fad.
His continuation on the BOE puts us in knowledgeable, experienced hands going forward.
|
Jim McLaughlin
Citizen
Username: Jmclaugh
Post Number: 56
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 1:03 pm: |
|
Gordon - "Frazer was pretty clear " Yeah? Can you state his position in one sentence? One word?
Sure, I can. "If Dr. Horoshak seeke renewal, his record whatever one may think of it, is not going to be sufficient to merit a new contract."
Dogbert - "The issue of who gets to pick Horoschak's successor is just an extension of the contract renewal issue. It's not dead at all."
You are absolutely right. That is a legitimate and vital issue and one that all voters should consider before casting their vote. I'm definitely voting for David Frazer and Gregg Betheil. I'm still thinking about my 3rd vote, and yes I will consider who is most qualified to be part of the process of picking a new superintendent. |
Gordon Agress
Citizen
Username: Odd
Post Number: 407
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 1:38 pm: |
|
Jim, I'd love to respond, but I've taken my meds. I'm sure there is some pertinent reply in the preceding reiterations.
In the meantime, I have become comfortably numb.
|
Jim McLaughlin
Citizen
Username: Jmclaugh
Post Number: 57
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 2:14 pm: |
|
Sorry Gordon if my "reiterations" are driving you crazy. Would you prefer that I not take your questions seriously? In your post of 11:40am, you asked me to state Frazer's position on the superintendent's renewal in one sentence. I did what you asked me to. Frazer said at the Hilton Debate, "If Dr. Horoschak seeks renewal, his record whatever one may think of it, is not going to be sufficient to merit a new contract." Maybe you just don't like the answer, but rest assured I don't require a pertinent reply from you.
(btw - you should talk to psychiatrist about your ocd meds ; the meds are so supposed to help your thought processes, not numb them or you.)
|
Gordon Agress
Citizen
Username: Odd
Post Number: 408
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 2:58 pm: |
|
Jim, I was referring to my own reiterations, which are probably driving readers crazy. If you thought I was mocking you, I must have written poorly and I apologize.
At 9:04 I wrote this about that very quote, or one very like it:
"And while your quote sounds negative toward renewal, you omit David's talk that his decision will be made on what Dr. H would have done in the future."
See? I'd say the same thing again. Well, I'd write it slightly better. I think I've heard everything you guys are likely to say, and I've put up some response to all of it. If you think you've got something new that I haven't replied to, let's hear it. I do want to be taken seriously, but I think I'm past the point where people find my contributions helpful.
If readers go through this thread carefully, I think they'll see why I find the incumbents, and some of their supporters, so frustrating. But I'm trying to replace the fanatic urge to respond to each repetition with trust that people will consider the arguments and think for themselves.
As for my psychiatrist -- I'm getting this stuff over the counter. Works great, too. Come on over, I'll pour you a glass, er, dose.
|
Jim McLaughlin
Citizen
Username: Jmclaugh
Post Number: 58
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 3:05 pm: |
|
Gordon, You asked for one sentence. I gave it to you. That sentence said it all for me; sorry if it didn't work for you. Btw - If readers go through this thread carefully, I think they'll see why I find the challengers, and some of their supporters, so perplexing. |
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2476
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 3:06 pm: |
|
"I'll pour you a glass, er, dose."
It's iced tea, right? |
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2477
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 3:16 pm: |
|
"I'm still thinking about my 3rd vote"
Jim McLaughlin: you will be voting for Marlon Brownlee, as will 3mom, just as soon as you both get done voting for Frazer and Betheil.
"Also, to my recollection, and I could be wrong here, Brian O'Leary and Bob Little are the only other Board members to have posted on MOL in the last 3 years."
Gregg, I believe your running mate has posted on MOL from time to time over the last three years, as have Lynne Crawford and Rowland Bennett.
Mtam: thanks for your summary. I can't say I disagree with any of it.
|
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2478
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 3:25 pm: |
|
"Above all else, vote. For if this entire political exercise yields 12% turnout..."
Interestingly, although it is still fairly low, voter turnout has, over all, been increasing over the past 6 years. In fact, turnout last year was more than double the turnout in 2000:
2000: 6.42%
2001: 9.27
2002: 7.56
2003: 8.91
2004: 13.35
2005: 15.90
|
Gordon Agress
Citizen
Username: Odd
Post Number: 409
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 3:26 pm: |
|
"Iced tea" is one way to go, sure, but involves tricky blending without any improvement in the delivery of active ingredients. Some patients find the blending more palatable, but a motivated patient will comply with the dosing regimen without it.
And I'm motivated.
|
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 14862
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 3:45 pm: |
|
I have ruled that Frazer was clear.
Next subject. |
Jim McLaughlin
Citizen
Username: Jmclaugh
Post Number: 59
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 3:57 pm: |
|
J. Crohn, By any chance do you have the voter turn-out statistics for the 1990's? |
J. Crohn
Supporter
Username: Jcrohn
Post Number: 2479
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 5:06 pm: |
|
JM-
Sorry, no. |
Jim McLaughlin
Citizen
Username: Jmclaugh
Post Number: 60
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 5:55 pm: |
|
Thanks anyway. I'd be curious to see what the turn-out was during or immediately after:
the teacher strike of 1990
the whole language vs phonic debates on the early to mid 90's
the redistricting debacle during Ralph Lieber's tenure (anyone remember the east/west proposal
and that truly wild meeting at CHS library)
the superintendent seach in 97-98,
the redistricting debates that finally led to the SB solution in 1999
There is no denying that we have had more than our share of challenges, more than our share of passionate and sometimes polarizing arguments, more than our share of contentious BOE election campaigns, and more than our share of dire predictions of doom. Yet, we have managed to survive and even thrive at times, and that is due in no small part to the BOE members who put in endless hours working on behalf of our children. I'll never forget the courage of Sabarah Sabin, who withstood physical threats to her and her family during the teachers strike. Or the tenacity of Bill Gold who spent three years as the 1 vote in all those 8-1 decisions. Or the quiet leadership of George Robinson, John Bradley, and Brian O'Leary who led us through all those painful redistricting battles. Or the strength of a seriously ill Shelley Riecke as she led the board through those first awful budget crisis that were created by the stupidity of the state government. I didn't always agree with them, but I respected the determination and dedication that they applied to the task at hand. |
Lydia
Supporter
Username: Lydial
Post Number: 1747
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 6:16 pm: |
|
Jim,
Quote:I'll never forget the courage of Sabarah Sabin, who withstood physical threats to her and her family during the teachers strike. Or the tenacity of Bill Gold who spent three years as the 1 vote in all those 8-1 decisions. Or the quiet leadership of George Robinson, John Bradley, and Brian O'Leary who led us through all those painful redistricting battles. Or the strength of a seriously ill Shelley Riecke as she led the board through those first awful budget crisis that were created by the stupidity of the state government. I didn't always agree with them, but I respected the determination and dedication that they applied to the task at hand.
Thanks for bringing it all into perspective - well said. |
wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2237
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 6:58 pm: |
|
I'll third that. |
LibraryLady(ncjanow)
Supporter
Username: Librarylady
Post Number: 3231
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 7:28 pm: |
|
Fourth! |
SO Ref
Citizen
Username: So_refugee
Post Number: 1664
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 9:20 pm: |
|
Ooh! Ooh! Ooh! Is the Horoschak resignation in any way related to the upcoming remake of "Welcome Back Kotter"?
Personally, I think Queer Eye's Jai Rodriguez would make a nice Horshak. |
wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2243
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 9:21 pm: |
|
Personally, I think you should be perfecting this stuff on Monday nights. |
SO Ref
Citizen
Username: So_refugee
Post Number: 1665
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 9:29 pm: |
|
Look here, Man's Hands...  |
wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2244
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 9:43 pm: |
|
I will never live this down. I'm now resigning from the human race. Feel better now, COMEDIAN?????????? |
SO Ref
Citizen
Username: So_refugee
Post Number: 1667
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 9:46 pm: |
|
I must say that Witty and I had a great time talking with you at Las's soiree. Hope to see you at HTTA some Monday evening.
|
wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2245
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 10:10 pm: |
|
You betcha. Give a big hello to Witty and I do hope to catch you on a Monday night. |
ess
Citizen
Username: Ess
Post Number: 1589
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 2, 2006 - 11:27 pm: |
|
Wendy, for what it's worth, I didn't think your hands looked like a man's hands at all. |
wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2246
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 3, 2006 - 6:14 am: |
|
Coming from someone with those eyes, it's actually worth a lot. Thanks! |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page