Comments on: MDUSD Parent Advisory Council to meet tonight

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:48:35 +0000

Did anyone see the Supt’s Powerpoint at the PAC on the Budget issues ?

By: Theresa Harrington

Theresa Harrington — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 22:12:56 +0000

You’re welcome.

And now, for something completely different: Do you think it’s possible to create peaceful schools? Here’s a blog post about a conference trying to do that: http://www.ibabuzz.com/onassignment/2012/02/02/today-is-deadline-for-educators-to-register-for-peace-conference/

By: g

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 21:30:04 +0000

Thanks, Theresa.

By: Theresa Harrington

Theresa Harrington — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 20:52:05 +0000

G: Here the list from the Sept. 7 mins (but I assume this only includes those who were present):
Cathy Boer, YVHS; Irene Caban, Sun Terrace Elem.; Natalie Fassio, Ayers Elem; Rene Garcia, Westwood Elem.; Linda Locke, Northgate HS; Cathy Myers, Diablo View MS and CVHS; Julie Newquist, Sequoia Elem.; Sue Noak, Strandwood Elem.; John Pamer, Silverwood Elem.; John Parker, MDHS; Francisco Rios, Cambridge Elem.; Cindy Rubin, CPHS; Joanna Sibley, Valle Verde Elem.; Tricia Tamura-Li, CAC; Marquisha Williams, Bel Air Elem.
Here is a list of the current BAC members: http://esb.mdusd.k12.ca.us/attachments/3eb18267-359d-45aa-b9a9-062be477aa45.pdf

Dr. J: I received no official notice from the district regarding tonight’s special meeting to evaluate General Counsel Greg Rolen: http://esbpublic.mdusd.k12.ca.us/public_agendaview.aspx?mtgId=357.
However, Board President Sherry Whitmarsh mentioned to me a few days ago that the board planned to either meet Feb. 2 or Feb. 7 for the evaluation, but she didn’t have her calendar with her. The superintendent’s secretary told me the special agenda was posted Monday on the Electronic School Board site.

Rolen continues to maintain the district was right to appeal the Fardella case. I plan to do an updated blog post about the continuing disagreement between the district and the Fardella family about who was right in that case.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 20:29:27 +0000

G: I wonder if the CC Times got their copy by the 5:00pm deadline last evening ?
I guess we all will be watching to see what time Monday’s agenda goes up tonight — what happens if members of the public cry foul — will they have to have the meeting another time ?
The multiple oral evaluations — always for information and not action — are ruses. When is that annual written evaluation by each Board member going to take place ? BP 2140 We are now in year three of his tenure. http://www.gamutonline.net/displayPolicy/373927/9

By: g

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 20:24:10 +0000

Theresa, going back to the PAC list. It seems to me that teachers in the District have a forum through the union, and site councils. Community members have the Board meetings and various other committees. Your list, and a published “sign in sheet” include people who may teach, but do not live in the district as well as people who do not have children in the district any longer.

It is great that they want to stay informed, just as I do, but exactly who is currently the “Advisory Committee” that has the floor and might sway opinion with the Superintendent? The District doesn’t seem to want to publish -anything- concerning the Committee. Can you ask for a “current” list?

A current list of the Budget Advisory Committee would also be appreciated.

By: g

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:41:52 +0000

Dr. J; You’re correct. They did not make the required timeline for proper Notice, but it was on the Agenda when I looked last night at 10:09. However, neither meeting was there the previous evening when I looked at 9:19.

Of course we know that no executive needs to be “reviewed” every month or two as they have supposedly done with Lawrence and Rolen this past several months, but it is an opportunity for Gary/Sherry to get in some quiet back room strategy building and schmoozing under the guise of job-talk.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:34:57 +0000

AB 1344 also limits compensation of agency executives — and it appears that it applies to not just the Supt but all department heads which would include all of the Asst. Supt’s, Directors, Principals and maybe more. This is significant because they all have clauses that have automatic % increases to match MDEA increases, and these clauses now appear to be banned by AB 1344.
3511.2. On or after January 1, 2012, any contract executed or renewed between a local agency and a local agency executive shall not provide for the following:
(a) An automatic renewal of a contract that provides for an automatic increase in the level of compensation that exceeds a cost-of-living adjustment.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:13:58 +0000

Psst … Greg, I guess your evaluation needs to get postponed from this afternoon since it was not posted timely on the internet. And I guess that also means no more “changes or additions” to the on line Agendas within the 72 hour time.
Here is the reference in case you have been so busy tied up in Small Claims Court. http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1301-1350/ab_1344_bill_20111009_chaptered.html

By: g

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 18:58:38 +0000

Theresa; I hope they find their own local voice very soon for West County. We need you here.

Every other school oriented Blog site in the District has gone silent (Strange-ly, all within a couple of months of each other). It seems Gary and Sherry couldn’t take the heat of tough questions once they got their majority, even with other bloggers like Ginsburg and Claycord firmly tucked in under Gary’s “good-buddy” wing. MDUSD PARENTS Blog and MDUSD VOICE apparently have either graduated out or simply lost interest, or maybe they got all they needed out of blogging once they got the board majority that they wanted.

Whatever the reasons–they’re all gone….