Comments on: Clayton Valley HS charter petition meeting Tuesday

By: Theresa Harrington

Theresa Harrington — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 20:09:37 +0000

Here is a post regarding the Tuesday hearing: http://bit.ly/pfXBF4.
As I mentioned before, I have several video clips, which I’ll try to post separately.
Just J: the CDE data report doesn’t show where the students came from. However, I’m sure the district has that information, since data now follows individual students from school to school.
g: School board members didn’t state opinions. Anon is referring to Mark Weinmann, who is on the PFC Board.

By: Just J

Just J — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 15:11:16 +0000

Theresa, Do we know how many from the continuation schools that dropped out were from CV? That would be interesting to know.

By: g

Fri, 12 Aug 2011 06:11:02 +0000

Anon, I thought board members were not going to discuss it until the next meeting. Did other board members also make statements?

By: anon

anon — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 05:52:46 +0000

The PFC VP #39 refers to spoke at the meeting Tuesday and admitted to being initially skeptical but is now in favor of the charter.

By: MDUSD Board Watcher

MDUSD Board Watcher — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 03:38:17 +0000

A certain board member is all about keeping and controlling his power. The charter diminishes his power. Therefore the outsized negative reaction by him and his evil minions.

By: Anon

Anon — Fri, 12 Aug 2011 00:34:12 +0000

Publicly I’ve only heard of the PFC VP with some reservations about the charter, and beyond that only a certain board member and my guess is a certain family member posting here. Absolutely every single CVHS parent and Clayton parent in general is for it. Until those against start signing their name public ally like the rest of us supporters I believe it is literally just one or two people against it… For their own motives, not the good of the school, kids or community. maybe a certain board member is jealous his kid didn’t get the same opportunity.

By: g

Fri, 12 Aug 2011 00:00:34 +0000

Exactly. They won’t influence the school chartering, but may look “forward” in negotiating with the District. Union choice is part of Teacher Trigger Chartering. I suspect more CVCHS teachers will choose to maintain their current associations if strong bargaining is at hand today (and to their benefit) with the District re furlough days.

The other question is; will the District see that the “costs” will eventually outweigh the benefits of SIG, or will they just jump into the deep end over their heads in an attempt to prove they can “fix” their SIG mistakes?

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 22:49:00 +0000

G, I am sorry but I don’t understand how MDEA has any ability to influence what CVCHS does. Personally, I think MDEA would love to come to an agreement with CVCHS because they could leverage it to promote more charters and better contracts with both MDUSD and the charters.

By: g

Thu, 11 Aug 2011 19:59:47 +0000

I would think MDEA also has the power to throw CVHS Charter talks into their mix of demands and considerations for the next couple of years. I wonder how/if they are looking forward at that.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 19:38:33 +0000

@Theresa, Do you really believe that when Lawrence submits to the CDE the “corrective action plan” to obtain the second year of SIG funds that he will disclose that the district has budgeted already for 5 to 12 furlough days for ALL schools, including SIG schools, which would wipe out the increased instructional time required to obtain the SIG funds ? While I know that the unions have not agreed to it, but frankly its just one of those wink ‘n nods. That is exactly why MDEA needs to nail down no furlough days for SIG schools now.