Comments on: Mt. Diablo superintendent recommends no other school closure

By: Wait a Minute

Wait a Minute — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 00:32:48 +0000

Cheryl Hansen does really hit it on the head on her website under her “My Perspective” link:

“MISTAKES MADE IN STRATEGIC PLANNING
Not having administrative leadership competent, credible, or committed enough to carry out the board’s strategic charges.”

By: Wait a Minute

Wait a Minute — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 23:35:12 +0000

Yes it easy to see how Lawrence looked like crap compared to real leaders at the Asilomar Conference.

Like I said when the MDUSD hired him, Lawrence is NOT a successful leader in any sense of the word.
I understand the only reason he was hired is his wife is from the area and she is politically connected.

In any case, he is dishonest and disingenuous and has a nasty mean streak. He’s a “screamer” and is regularly blaming and abusive towards subordinates.

He has a higher degree (PHD I think) in math so when he’s giving out false numbers at meetings he is almost certainly purposely LYING!!!

Hopefully a Grand Jury or OCR investigation will get to the bottom of Lawrence and the others’ lies and ethical breaches as the sooner they leave the MDUSD the sooner the real problems at the MDUSD can be dealt with honestly.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 03:09:33 +0000

Lawrence should get an F for not doing his homework — the SIG grant ceased for Glenbrook when the Board voted to close the school. Has MDUSD already notified the state ? Bondgate is growing by the minute. And we pay this guy $250,000 a year and he can’t even get a Powerpoint out on time — and then it is inaccurate. How embarrassing. If Lawrence were Japanese, he would fall on his sword.

By: Theresa Harrington

Theresa Harrington — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 02:57:44 +0000

Actually, MDUSD’s loss could benefit other districts (unless MDUSD decides to apply for grants for Oak Grove and/or Meadow Homes Elementary, which would require them to replace the principals).
According to the USDOE SIG guidance document: If an agency decides it is unable to implement its improvement plan, “…the LEA must notify its SEA immediately that it is unable to implement the model for which it applied and was awarded funds and must cease obligating SIG funds in that school…The SEA should then rescind the relevant portion of the LEA’s SIG grant. Any portion of the LEA’s grant that is rescinded should be carried over and combined with the funds available for the following year’s SIG competition.”
Since Glenbrook’s application was highly rated, another district might be inclined to copy it to get funding.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 02:07:00 +0000

MDUSD has become the laughing stock of California education — even the subject of cocktail ridicule at the Asilomar Conference on Curriculum. Only applying for SIG funds at 4 of 6 peristently underperforming schools, and then a few months later voting to close one of them after they SPENT the money. Now the expert high achieving Supts effectively disc’d MDUSD by listing the steps needed to be taken by underperforming districts and MDUSD is doing NONE of them. Frankly, the other districts who didn’t get the grants, ought to sue MDUSD for misrepresentation in its applications. Was Lawrence acting on his own or under the direction of the Board ? Sounds like Watergate — well, folks, its Bondgate. Another notch in the belt.

By: Theresa Harrington

Theresa Harrington — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 01:36:38 +0000

A USDOE SIG guidance document released in February states: “Given the rigorous LEA (Local Education Agency) application and SEA (State Education Agency) review process required to receive a SIG grant, it should be exceedingly rare that an LEA receiving funds to implement a turnaround, restart, or transformation model in a school subsequently decides to close the school instead. However, the Department recognizes that under certain rare circumstances that could not have been foreseen at the time the LEA developed its original application, an LEA might decide that closing such a school is the best course of action.”
The district decided to close schools more than a year ago and was fully aware of that when the board approved Glenbrook’s SIG application in June. In the competitive process, Mt. Diablo was lauded for its well thought-out applications, which beat out other applications deemed to be less worthy of receiving limited grant funding. I wonder how many other districts that received such grants are closing their schools instead.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:56:25 +0000

@GMS OM — Every MDUSD teacher and every administrator makes more in gross salary every year than the prior year, because they are all rewarded every year for ‘longevity’ which increases their gross salary by a percentage. The only execption was last year when administrators took their furlough days, which reduced their overall salary by one or two percent. Most significantly, because MDUSD did it “wrong”, they only got like 98% credit for service year which will impact their retirement. This is why teachers are so opposed to furlough days.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:44:33 +0000

Lawrence & MDUSD got taken to school today by a panel of successful Supt’s at the Asilomar Conference, including the Long Beach Supt — Lawrence’s alleged idol. According to my friend attending the conference, the expert panel outlined the steps a successful district needs to take to “turn around” — NONE of which MDUSD is doing. Ask any of the MDUSD attendees for their notes — hope they took detailed notes. I wonder which 5 Star they are having dinner tonight — remember that when they say they can’t pay for pencils and paper.

By: Wait a Minute

Wait a Minute — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:25:46 +0000

Gotta love their math huh!

In the end, flawed decisions from flawed people will likely cost the taxpayers far more money then it will ever save.
I can only imagine the litigation and complaince costs to the MDUSD if the OCR investigates/substantiates any targeting of successful schools primarily serving low-income populations.
This is a very real possibility considering how flawed and how much the data appears to have been twisted to justify closing Glenbrook.
Besides the negative financial effects will be the more important loss of public support for the MDUSD. Good luck backfilling any of the lost State funds with further local support like parcel taxes or bonds.

I predict that well-run Charter schools will come in and siphon off a steadily growing number of students and home schooling will also increase and these will further weaken the district’s finances.

By: GMS OM

GMS OM — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 14:40:13 +0000

Cuts…actually O.M. took a one month salary cut (to 11 months) and 1/2 hr a day cut (now work 7 1/2 hrs a day). My frustration…at Board meetings you get up…you make public comment but many comments are actually questions or ideas that are never addressed. I’m confused…doesn’t the trustees work for us???? Most of them…not all need to take a lesson in Backwards Planning…School Closure has been a circus. They knew Glenbrook was very low income when they first began…duh…it is a Title 1 school!! Not only are they forfeiting SIG funds…but also Title 1 funds…wow…I think they need an accountant on the Board? They are relinquishing about 2 mil of GMS money alone to save maybe $150,000…it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that closing Glenbrook will forfeit alot of State and Federal funds that many students benefited from…I guess that isn’t a high priority for the Board??? What is their priority anyway??? VERY FRUSTRATED AND SAD FOR STUDENTS AND THE GLENBROOK COMMUNITY…IT IS SO UNFAIR!!!