I agree that we are seeing the results of cost cutting and most of your examples are good examples however we are also seeing the results of poor leadership and most definitely abysmal public relations. The loss of the communication position had far less to do with the budget and much more to do with the 2008 takeover of the Board majority and the ousting of the Superintendent. That position was a casualty of a very public war amongst members of the Board and the Superintendent.

The incompetence from this District includes the hiring of a Superintendent who has never led a District of this size, a Superintendent who does not have the skills needed to be an effective communicator, a Superintendent who does not believe in strategic planning, a Superintendent without a vision, and collectively all this means a Superintendent without leadership skills.

In addition, at time when the cuts from Sacramento are hurting the quality of education for our children this Board chose not to do the hard work necessary to pass a parcel tax (most Districts require two attempts before they are successful) and instead pursued a costly bond measure that will most likely burden future generation’s ability to pass a bond for school facilities down the road. Many people do not understand the bonding capacity of a district and the rules pertaining to the caps on issuing bonds.

The solar project is a joke. If Mr. Eberhart had put half the energy into a parcel tax campaign that he has put into the largest school district solar project in the country then perhaps we would have $7.5mil more annually in the general fund right now. Oh he speaks in terms of hundreds of millions of dollars to make you think his deal is good but if you base the solar projections on a 20 yr analysis to coincide with the timeframe guaranteed by SunPower, solar simply breaks even.

The strategic plan should be the road map for the vision of this district. Our District leadership should make every decision based on the strategic plan. It should be an integral part of every budget presentation and agenda item. It should include community advisory groups in order to utilize much needed community resources like time, money, and expertise. But instead Ms. Whitmarsh said there will be no community advisory boards and the Superintendent has made it clear that he does not believe in strategic planning but prefers goals and objectives. The devastating results from a lack of planning has been proven in this District over and over… most notably with the closure of Glenbrook and Holbrook.

We should be outraged at the fear mongering and spinning of information as it relates to the Clayton Valley charter. Forget about what it does to the charter process itself, which is bad enough, but the most horrendous violation of public trust is what it has done to our communities. True and good leadership would not pit one neighbor against another to win a policy debate.

As the rhetoric on all sides builds the District leadership has collapsed the lines of communication not opened them. The loss of the MDUSD blog, the shutting down of the broadcast Board meetings, the lack of communication from the Superintendent, the unwillingness to provide documents to members of vital oversight committees, Board members desires to speak privately rather than publicly to those who disagree with their policies, the lack of Board inclusiveness and a lack of Board tolerance for those Board members with opposing views or concerns should be an ongoing concern for those of us who want more transparency and an open and honest process.

So Another CV Parent, while we agree the budget cuts hurt our schools and our children we disagree about the our District leadership. They may care about the kids in this District but I personally will need to see a much better approach to improving the state of our district before I would support their reelection or champion their efforts.

There is no better time to unite a body of individuals then when collectively they face a greater enemy… In this case the greater enemy is the State of California and yet we completely lack the leadership to follow.

We’re certainly seeing the results of the cost cutting in our District. We have busing problems for the special ed kids after that responsibility was reassigned due to budget cuts. We have students without textbooks after the summer hours were cut back for the school site staff that would have caught such errors in the past. We have parent fundraising keeping high school athletics afloat. It’s terrible, but that’s what happens when we cut funding to education. I agree the district is terrible at PR, but didn’t the point person for that get laid off a while ago?

My children have been in this school system for many years. I’ve followed the school board fairly closely. I don’t always agree with their decisions, but I do believe Mayo, Eberhart, and Whitmarsh all care deeply about this district and have done their best for it. I haven’t observed Dennler and Hansen long enough to form an opinion about them.

Keep in mind that the Clayton Valley charter is a “teacher trigger” conversion. It wasn’t started by the parents or the community. It was started by the teachers in response to cuts in their own pay. They saw a way to get more money for CVHS and pay themselves more. They thought the extra money would come from the state, but it doesn’t. It comes from the MDUSD budget. Their gain is everbody else’s loss.

They probably have to continually tweek it as they read the comments being posted.

Keep the pressure up people, I have news from the inside that it is really starting to get to people in Dent.

While I generally agree with your statement I think its important to add the effect of leadership into the equation.

Good leaders can and are successful despite the challenges, bad leaders just make problems worse.

Organizational performance tends to track their leader’s performance at managing and LEADING.

I just did likewise — read this entire thread.

However my takeaway differs from yours. I interpret all of this District and public angst as the logical result of what happens when public officials lose the trust of the governed. This is actually a pretty compelling case study in how government agencies can go wrong; and how layers of over-regulation of local government districts by the feds and state yield chaos and squandering of precious resources on compliance/red tape.

Parents and taxpayers feel betrayed, misled, manipulated and used by the MDUSD Board and staff (current and prior). From academic performance issues to questionable bond spending, the District has failed to meet public expectations on all counts. While some may quibble about differing degrees to which these public perceptions are justified, there is no doubt that the District is lying in the bed it has made for itself. Its recent PR gaffes belie the fact that, with the District, we’re dealing with political amateurs.

Not unlike the dynamics of a nightmare divorce, once the trust is gone there’s no basis for rebuilding the relationship. In this case, it’s apparent that increasing numbers of MDUSD parents have given up hope that the District can reform itself. The CVCHS effort makes this statement with unmistakeable clarity.

If the charter approach results in academic and operational improvements at CV, then it’s a no-brainer that other District schools will pursue the charter option. Doing so is a rational response to a clearly dysfunctional relationship between the District and the community it is charged with serving.

In short, the CV charter effort is “customer feedback” to the District. It’s called “voting with your feet.” Because the District is a government monopoly, it need not change. To achieve improvements, parents must separate from MDUSD because there is no expectation that the District is capable of improving its quality and efficiency in the short term — though increased competition may result in some improvements over the long term.

Operative word here: “May.”

The morass of government regulation of CA schools stacks the deck against the District, over the long term; one could argue that this District is an organization that is set up for failure, by virtue of its complexity, size and the burden of red tape under which it operates. MDUSD’s loss of public trust and confidence only exacerbates its structural defects.