Thank you for letting all who read this blog for telling the truth. I have never had a problem with anyone disagreeing with my opinions or suggestions. My only beef is when there are uncalled for personal attacks.

My purpose for posting on this site is to let folks know that sometimes it is important to understand the history of HUSD, because so many time history repeats itself. Since I have “worked” during the time of approximately 8 superintendents and their various administrations, I have seen and experienced many different styles, educational “visions”, open and closed door policies and have assisted parents and students during each of them, I just felt that there may be some value in sharing my own lessons and observations.

If there are folks out there who wish to pick my brain or actually need assistance in walking thru the muck and mire I am only a question or request away.

Cheryl in your post criticizing Ms. Kathi Booth. Where were you Cheryl when Mr. John Kyle was telling us where Ms. Booth lives and ridiculing her husband’s illness just because Ms. Booth had a different opinion? Cheryl you need to read the posts of Mr. Kyle before you come to his defense.

This Mr. Armas that Mr. Kyle supports so blindly is in over his head. He is not qualified for this board position, and in my mind, he is a puppet of those in power. Is Mr. Kyle going to marry him since he adores him so much. Do not vote for incompetent board trustees.

We should all be entitled to have opinions without someone ridiculing us and stalking us. I just hope Mr. Kyle and those that support him do not know where I live or where my kids go to school. By the way Mr. Kyle I do not care where you live or your scribbles about your childhood. Ms. Kathi Booth you go girl!!

Once and for all you did reveal where I lived and you did reveal information about a member of my family. YOu know it and so do I and so does anybody who read your entry before Mr. Kurhi removed it. Don’t deny what you have done you are dishonest to do so.

I have simply stated that I have much knowledge about the history of HUSD and much experience dealing with the roadblocks placed in the paths of so many of its students and families. I related my years of direct volunteering in the classroom, school office and at various other venues within HUSD. It was done simply to assure people that I had some foundation to allow me to critique the district and its current administrators.

I really should be honored that you, on your own, have given me so much power of persuasion over those who post on this blog. Is that really what you are afraid of Mr. Kyle, that some other voice may be listened to and appreciated? I do not oppose constructive thought, I simply reserve the right not to fall lock step into what you believe is the one and only way to resolve a problem.

TTFN Mr. Kiiile

Thanks for the defense!

At my entry numbered as #59 above, I revealed some horrific statistics taken from a report prepared by HUSD and submitted to a small obscure section within the Calif. Dept of Education, operating out of Sacramento.

I recited some pretty horrible statistics at #59 above which are horribly poor unto themselves and supposedly relative to truancy rate occurring at our separate schools and broken down into revelation of experience at K-6, Middle schools and High Schools.

At the last meeting of the Board of Trustees I brought those statistical matters forward in a fashion which should have, by now, resulted in the matter being brought to their agenda pretty darn soon.

Questions should be asked of the State, both as to the methodology as well as the purpose of the report. Especially when that report indicates an over all truancy rate of 48.94% of the total enrollment established on October 1, 2009. I question that methodology which revealed such a staggering statistic. Methodology as well as the purpose of the report ought be fully revealed. It does unjust damage to the public image of this community.

To describe or imply that 74% of our High school students are ‘Truants’ requires enquiry! I think it to be a measure which fails to recognize that the accumulated number of absences exceeding three or more days might easily be confused with ’transience’ as well as existence of a hard core number of youngsters enamored of opportunity to join in at the ‘cash flash’ corners where illicit sales of flesh and ill advised substances are occurring.. Why go to school when considerable money is garnered at ‘cash flash’ corners located at or near troubled arterials?

I attempted use of humor at #59 so that the ’Kathy’s of the world
WOULD NOT ATTEMPT TO DISPUTE ACCURACY OF WHAT I derived and brought forward from that report. Frankly, I think the report to be a joke in whatever use of methodology was employed. It is especially damaging when recognizing that the data will be circulated on a broad basis outside this school district. Do we purposely limit use of expulsion as an action against hard core truants?

I suspect that the accumulated numbers of student absences might easily be laid at the feet of our potential ‘dropouts’ who escape their duty to themselves as well as their parents and the community….. To attend to those matters, which I heard described at a meeting of those interested in the Mentor – Mentee discussions at Palma Ceia Baptist church, last March 13th, requires community wide effort of individuals representing all races and religious faiths existent within the district.

The lure of quick cash , is appealing and apparently out weighs and thus defeats any notion of getting a formal education with potential for a better future. The threat of trips to the penitentiary seems lost in the thought processes of children who lack comfortable housing and are subjected to parenting by those whose own education is lost in similar experience at truancy, especially when combined with transience.

Kathy is not really a bully but.. Kathy in my opinion is attempting domination by what she describes as superior experience in all matters, in the world of blog discussion, involving HUSD.

I did not reveal personal information matters about the woman. What Mr. Kurhi revealed to me was that she took offense when I had I very briefly wrote of a person, who I thought to be close to the woman. I thought I had expressed admiration for the individual in question, who in my mind set was dealing heroically with a serious health matter. How that was interpreted as disclosure of personal matters is still a mystery to me. Note also, that I revealed no names.

Again, I wonder if she thought I was telling an untruth about a contributor, ( Obama new age) whose once frequent long, irrational, poorly expressed thoughts and who was not justified in frequent acts of slander directed at Mr. Armas. That individual did not and does not yet understand the difference between license and freedom of speech ! Her accusations directed at the moral character of Mr. Armas were totally untrue and unacceptable.

To my knowledge none indicated recognition or acceptance of that which was submitted by that venomous individual. Yet Kathy and others defended her right to say it! I dispute that on the basis of the moral fact that there is huge difference between exercise of free speech and exercise of licentious slander. I even attempted to see Obama new age accept a suggestion that she seek counseling from her religious counselor, deacon or Pastor.

The last of her many contributions that I bothered reading saw her expressing the fact that she was going to vote against Mr. Armas. The right to vote, in her case, is a bit confusing in view of the fact that she had moved to Oakland as a means of escaping, (whatever she was fleeing from,) that which caused her dissatisfaction in Hayward.

Ms. Booth also has objections to my effort, as seen introduced on the editorial page of the Daily Review issue of June 3, 2010; The article referred to my belief that Hayward needs a Town Hall meeting which would be conducted beyond the purview of both City and School District.

The ‘My word’ article called for a town hall meeting to be held outside the procedural controls employed by HUSD or the City. It would start without an agenda, thus no compliance or need to observe the Brown act, under any stretch of imagination by those who oppose the thought. A town hall meeting would see use of ’break out groups’ which do not exceed 20 individuals seated at one table. The single biggest rule governing a Town Hall meeting would be that worthwhile ideas are sought but that all negative references, finger pointing or negative, muddy aspersions cast upon HUSD Administration or trustees would be forbidden.

What is desired is a free flow of ideas intended to aid HUSD without direct involvement of staff. Trustees would be invited solely for the purpose or permitting them opportunity to observe and perhaps measure strengths of the community.

Booth’s announced objection to Town Hall concept seems to center on my use of those two little words…‘ad hoc’! Her aversion appears to be based upon experiences she said she had when involved within groups organized by HUSD Staff or Trustees.
I think she and I agree that some of those large scale groups have spent energy as well as monetary reserves …. with no results occurring after much time investment.

If ad hoc groups or task forces employed within HUSD ’s historical attempts to cure it’s continuing problems have left a bad taste in Ms. Booth’s mouth (as well as my own) why is that sufficient reason to abandon the Town Hall Concept? Surely we are all smart enough to recognize that the so called ‘Town Hall Meetings’ used and displayed in the political games of the last election, are not the reason we must abandon the idea! Or are we not sufficiently endowed with knowledge about their use in the early history of this nation?

I suggest that what we ought attempt is the creation of opportunity for older folk, empty nesters, retirees, new comers to the community, (regardless of age), as well as those who are just plain interested in expanding their contacts within the community, to come together and organize themselves in groups involved with common interests.

It is my observation that parents of public school children are in need of examples of community support beyond passing a bond issue or parcel tax.

Example:

If we had a separate ad hoc group, involving senior citizens, working at what I describe as fund raising activities WE MIGHT, easily see results that bring in as much as $100,000 PER YEAR DEDICATED TO BE USED FOR SUPPORT OF MUSIC AND SPORTS PROGRAMS !

Call that one the ‘ad hoc’ group for sports and promotions involving ‘Hole in One’ contests, rummage/flea market gatherings or Christmas tree sales occurring on unused or lightly used High School parking lots such as that at the Mt. Eden HS lot facing Hesperian Blvd.

I could go on…. But why would be the point if Ms. Booth, a well established ‘community leader’ is determined to oppose constructive thought….

Good luck to you Ms. Booth… JUST STOP KNOCKING the honest efforts of others..

Again I believe yours and Ms. Rocchio’s postings hit the nail on the head. Both of you are inciteful persons who seem to understand the underlying problems facing this communit. Keep up your monitoring of the district and the board. It is comments and observations such as yours that spur others to examine what is happening in HUSD.

I agree with you that the most important topics should be early on the agenda. The agenda is developed by the President and Vice president. I have respected Mr. Frumkin for a very long time, but I don’t see him there anymore. It seems we have already being taken over; not by the state, but by an employee of the district.
I am becoming a cynic and my daughter has not finish elementary school yet. I appreciate your optimism, continue working for our community.

After reading Mr. Kyle’s postings 63-66 last evening, I was tempted to say that it was an imposter, however, I live by the rule that all should receive a second chance and that there is some good in each and every one of us. How foolish I now feel!!!

Mr. Kyle,
Again you make assumptions based upon no factual data regarding me or anyone else you choose to malign and attack in your postings.

1.You have no idea whether I did or did not take the bar, for that matter it is none of your business what my motives were for studying the law.

2.If you want to know how familiar I am with Mr. Armas and his time as city manager, I suggest you go straight to the source. But, for your edification, I am fully aware of his abilities and if you ask him I am sure that he will tell you that I stronly urged him to apply for the position of superintendent. It is in that position that I feel he could have made many positive strides for the students and employees of HUSD. Surprise, Surprise…Mr. Armas and I have actually spoken to one another.

I care not how many postings I have placed on this blog, as long as I am able to reach just one individual with factual information that may help them to understand the workings of HUSD.

By the way Mr. Kyle, perhaps we can make a deal, since I am relatively good at editing copy. Maybe before you post your rambling, viscious, diatribes I could help you with spelling and sentence construction.

To Qodrn,

I had a very positive experience in the Charquin Program and while each and every parent and teacher had free will and the guarantee of free speech, my grandson’s academic life was enriched and made stronger by the Charquin Program. If you truly understood the philosophy of Charquin you would know that having parents contribute, in what were at that time called “Centers” you would understand that the philosophy encouraged all adults to share knowledge with children. The Charquin Program stimulated many adults to return to school and obtain thier credentials so that they could contribute to public education.

Obviously Charquin was not for everybody but, it did instill in the students a sense of tolerance for those who were “different”, a love for learning, and an understandting of community spirit. Was it perfect? Certainly not, but it was a much better environment for my grandson to grow and blossom as a person and a life long learner.

There is also some discussion above regarding Public Comments at the Board Meetings. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the Board has recently appointed an employee to sit behind the Board and “organize” the comment cards received. They are separated by items on the agenda and also “bundled” by topic. This process now means that speakers will not always be called by the order cards were submitted. I know this is a difficult change for those used to arriving early to ensure being called early. It is also seen by some as a means to move the more undesirable topics to the late hours of the meeting in hopes those speakers will retire for the night. Which way did you like best? Speakers called in order cards received or “bundled” by topic?

I have also noticed that the late hours of the recent meetings have caused people to be creative in filling out their comment cards to be allowed to speak during Public Comments rather than wait until agenda item finally comes up. Again, can we move topics of big interest to early on the agenda for the sake of the community??

Nice to have Mr. Kyle back. Your messages of yesterday sent me to double check my depression meds.