Part of the Bay Area News Group

MDUSD on Monday to receive public input on strategic plan priorities, hear solar report and discuss November ballot initiatives

By Theresa Harrington
Thursday, September 6th, 2012 at 9:10 pm in Education, Mt. Diablo school district.

For blog readers who are interested in commenting on Monday’s board meeting, I have posted the agenda below. Highlights include an early meeting to allow the public to prioritize the strategic plan, a special report on the district’s solar projects and the possible endorsement of Prop. 30 (Gov. Brown’s initiative, which is backed by teachers’ unions) or Prop. 38 (Molly Munger’s initiative, which is backed by the state PTA, including Trustee Linda Mayo):

“1.0 Call to Order
1.1 President will call the meeting to order. Info
1.2 Board Member Lynne Dennler will participate via teleconference from 27 Hui Drive, Lahaina, HI Info
2.0 Announcements
2.1 In closed session, the Board will consider the items listed on the closed session agenda. Info
3.0 Public Comment
3.1 The public may address the Board concerning items that are scheduled for discussion during closed session only. These presentations are limited to three minutes each, or a total of thirty minutes for all speakers or the three minute limit may be shortened. Speakers are not allowed to yield their time. Info
4.0 Adjourn to Closed Session at 6:00 p.m.
4.1 Negotiations – The Board may discuss negotiations or provide direction to its representatives regarding represented employees, pursuant to EERA (Govt. Code Section 3549.1) Agency negotiators: Julie Braun Martin and Deborah Cooksey. Agencies: MDEA, CSEA, Local One M&O, Local One CST, MDSPA, and Supervisory. Action
4.2 Anticipated Litigation Info
4.3 Public Employee Discipline/Dismissal/Release/Complaint Info

5.0 Community Meeting
5.1 Open Community Meeting at 6:30 p.m. Info
5.2 Public Priortization on Strategic Plan Info
5.3 Adjourn Community Input Meeting at 7:00 p.m. Info

6.0 Reconvene Open Session
6.1 Reconvene Open Session at 7:00 p.m. Info
7.0 Preliminary Business
7.1 Pledge of Allegiance and Roll Call Info
8.0 Report Out Action Taken in Closed Session
8.1 Report of Closed Session September 10, 2012 Info
8.2 Negotiations Info
8.3 Anticipated litigation Info
8.4 Public Employee Discipline/Dismissal/Release/Complaint Info

9.0 Consent Agenda
Action
9.1 (Item #1) Items listed under Consent Agenda are considered routine and will be approved/adopted by a single motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items; however, any item may be removed from the consent agenda upon the request of any member of the Board and acted upon separately. Action
9.2 (Item #2) Minutes of the meeting of August 20, 2012 Action
9.3 Item #3) Recommended Action for Certificated Personnel Action
9.4 (Item #4) Request to increase Full Time Equivalent (FTE) for the 2012-2013 school year. Action
9.5 (Item #5) Saint Mary’s College of California Student Placement Agreement with Mt. Diablo Unified School District Action
9.6 (Item #6) California State University, Chico Internship Agreement with Mt. Diablo Unified School District Action
9.7 (Item #7) Samuel Merritt University Student Teaching Agreement with Mt. Diablo Unified School District Action
9.8 (Item #8) Approval of Provisional Intership Permit (PIP) Request Action
9.9 (Item #9) Recommended Action for Classified Personnel Action
9.10 (Item #10) Classified Personnel: Create an Instructional Assistant-Computer Position for Mountain View Elementary School Action
9.11 (Item #11) Award of Inspector of Record (Project Inspector) Contract Action
9.12 (Item #12) Clayton Valley Charter High School: Measure C High School Project List Action
9.13 (Item #13) Final Change Order: Fix Painting Company: Exterior Painting of Ygnacio Valley High School Action
9.14 (Item #14) Notice of Completion for Bid #1607/C-911 Action
9.15 (Item #15) Contract Amendment: PHd Architects: Modification of Auto/Metal Shop at Northgate High School-’Project Lead the Way’ Engineering Pathway Action
9.16 (Item #16) Contract Amendment: PHd Architects: Design Modifications Required to facilitate Use of District Pre-Checked (PC) Design as a Kindergarten Classroom. Action
9.17 (Item #17) Approve Independent Service Contract with Dr. Adria Klein for Staff Development in Literacy at Meadow Homes Elementary School Action
9.18 (Item #18) Award of Design Services Contract For Stadium Improvement Project at College Park High School Action
9.19 (Item #19) Award of Inspector of Record (Project Inspector) Contract for Interim Housing Installation at Mt. Diablo High School Action
9.20 (Item #20) Award of Inspector of Record (Project Inspector) Contract Action
9.21 (Item #21) Funding Source Correction: Award of Lease/Leaseback Agreement for Construction of New Chemistry Buildings Action
9.22 (Item #22) Approve contract/purchase order with Beyond the Words, Inc. for the services of Educational Interpreters for the Deaf for school year 2012-2013 Action
9.23 (Item #23) Approve contract increase to independent service contract with Kristin Obrinsky, Physical Therapist Action
9.24 (Item #24) Approval of master contract between Mt. Diablo Unified School District (MDUSD) and Progressus Therapy Services to provide District-Wide Occupational/Physical Therapy Services for the 2012-2013 school year and 2012-2013 Extended School Year Program. Action
9.25 (Item #25) Increase Contract between Mt. Diablo School District (MSUSD) and Maxim Services, Non Public Agency (NPA) for the 2012-2013 school year Action
9.26 (Item #26) Increase purchase order between Mt. Diablo Unified School District (MDUSD) and Speech Pathology Group for Speech and Language services for the 2012-2013 School Year Action
9.27 (Item #27) Contract with Center for Human Development (CHD) Action
9.28 (Item #28) Approval of Independent Service Contract with Dr. Cynthia Peterson Action

10.0 Consent Items Pulled for Discussion

11.0 Public Comment

11.1 The public may address the Board regarding any item within the jurisdiction of the Board of Education of the Mt. Diablo Unified School District that is not on this agenda. These presentation are limited to three minutes each, or a total of thirty minutes for all speakers, or the three minute limit may be shortened. If there are multiple speakers on any one subject, the public comment period may be moved to the end of the meeting. Speakers are not allowed to yield their time. Info

12.0 Communications
12.1 District Organizations – At regular Board meetings, a single spokesperson of each recognized district organization may make a brief presentation following the Consent Agenda. Items are limited to those which are informational. Info

13.0 Reports/Information
13.1 Solar Project Progress Report – Bill Kelly Info

14.0 Superintendent’s Report
14.1 Superintendent’s Report Info

15.0 Business/Action Items
15.1 Appointment of Administrator, Necessary Small High School/Vice Principal Action
15.2 Appointment of Coordinator, Student/Community Services 9-12 Action
15.3 Appointment of Coordinator, Student/Community Services 9-12 Action
15.4 Appointment of Coordinator, Student Services 6-8 Action
15.5 Appointment of Program Specialist/Special Education Action
15.6 Certification of the District’s 2011-2012 Unaudited Actual Financial Report Action
15.7 Resolution # 12/13-05 Adopting the District’s 2011-2012 GANN Appropriations Limit Action
15.8 Approve 2012-2013 Interagency Agreement #74-371-3 between MDUSD and Contra Costa County Services, Mental Health Division Action
15.9 Approve Interagency agreement between Mt. Diablo Unified School District (MDUSD) and Contra Costa Health Services, Mental Health Division Action
15.10 Board Resolution in Support of Proposition 30 Action
15.11 Board Resolution in Support of Proposition 38 Action
15.12 2012-13 Mandate Block Grant Letter of Intent Action
15.13 Board Action Progress Report Info
15.14 Amendment to BP 2140(a) Evaluation of the Superintendent Info
15.15 Meeting Extension Action
16.0 Board Member Reports
16.1 Board reports – two minute time limit Info

17.0 Closed Session
17.1 Items not completed during the first Closed Session will be carried over to this closed session. Action
18.0 Adjournment
18.1 Adjourn Meeting Info”

What do you think is the most interesting item on Monday’s agenda?

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • Anon

    Shouldn’t one of the items be figuring out why young disadvantaged children are being forced to walk to school in the wee hours of the morning, hiding out until adults arrive, and nearly freezing to death in the winter?

    Shouldn’t Rolen as director of transportation have this front and center?

    Also, it appears that the No On Whitmarsh blog picked up on this story.

    mdusdelection2012.blogspot.com

  • shakespeare

    I think your next topic should be why the district ignored the calls of Shore Acres Elementary, Rio Vista, and River View when they were placed on lockdown following the shooting of the victim on 9/6/12. The students at Shore Acres Elementary were on lockdown until after 5pm this evening without proper emergency supplies. The district was called plenty of times and yet the district FAILED to call back. It was the employees and hard working staff of Shore Acres that dealt with the chaos of such a situation. Had this been Clayton Valley or Walnut Acres, I’m 100% confident in saying that the superintendent himself would have ran to their aid. It is sickening to see how much these students truly mean to the district; not just the students but the employees of MDUSD. The district has no excuse as to why they didn’t answer their phones; they simply DID NOT WANT TO. Had this been a natural disaster or, God forbid, an actual gunmen on campus; WHERE WOULD THE DISTRICT STAND THEN!? Would they let a madman just run around the campus and not give a damn? Every one was present at this time and all the staff came together to keep the students calm and relaxed. It is revolting to know that not one person from the district called or showed up to check on the students or staff; it is nauseating to know that in times of endangerment our schools , students, and staff are left to fend for themselves. The MDUSD is a disgusting excuse for a school district and does not care about its students or staff. Where is the superintendent who so eagerly begged for our votes!? NO WHERE TO BE FOUND.

  • SP

    Yes, Shakespeare.
    We hear you.
    Calling the district for help only to hear a deafening silence in response is horrifying, and it’s not an isolated incident, even if the calls for help are different in scope.
    Some district officials, particulary Julie Braun Martin and all of those in personnel hired to HELP employees, pick and choose their priorities, which means that certain people do not show up on their radar screens.
    Or, if they do show up, they are quickly wiped away.
    Theresa, in response to items that should be on the board’s agenda: Shakespeare’s experience is a good intro.
    What about putting the following devastating and ongoing problem on the agenda:
    HOW, specifically, does the district, more specifically, the personnel dept. respond to MDUSD employees when they seek protection due to workplace harassment at the hand of administrators? While there was some visibility of this issue recently, at a couple of sites, a more global discussion of how pervasive this issue is and what the impact is on our teachers is important.
    Moreover, it is critical to evaluate how the district handles these problems.
    The process of seeking help, legally, is supposed to be a confidential one, in order to keep employees safe until they decide to make a formal claim.
    Currently, however, this confidentiality is not always kept, and employees are then put at greater risk.
    It would be nice to see this issue finally come to light at a board meeting.
    Of course, Julie Braun Martin will deny that this problem exists, but what else is new?

  • Anon

    Shakespeare-Agreed. Meanwhile Dennler is in Hawaii again

  • Recall Dennler

    It is time to Recall Dennler. All she does is vote with Gary and Sherry, she has no interest in doing what is right for the children.

  • Anon

    1, 2 & 3 – go to the board meeting and bring up the topics. Get as many parents as you can who feel the same and show up. The line for the Public Comment should be out the door. If no one shows up, there is no issue.

    When my kids attended MDUSD when there was an issue, we showed up in force at the meetings.

    This is your chance. You have today and Monday to mobilize your fellow parents. It’s been done in the past and is very powerful in getting things done.

  • Wait a Minute

    Stevie Lawrence, Greg Rolen, etc are like that captain of the Italaian cruise liner who ran his ship aground showing off to his girlfriend and then abandoned the ship ahead of his charges.

    These people can’t even be relied upon in normal times much less when there is a real emergency.

    Tell all your friends to VOTE NO ON WHITMARSH!!!

  • Anon

    WAM-ditto.

    #4-better yet go over the heads of this hapless hopeless district. everyone should contact the elected officials who share responsibility for the safety of these children. email senator desaulnier, assemblyperson bonilla, county supervisors mitchoff and glover, and the county office of education which used to provide busing.

    honestly remember last year the busing scandals. this year they cut busing and it’s morphed into the walking scandals. immediately this must stop for the sake of the kids.

    aloha dennler!

  • Theresa Harrington

    Anon: Board President Sherry Whitmarsh has also indicated in the past that she gives more weight to issues, if she receives emails about them — even if there is public comment.
    Email addresses for all board members except Trustee Gary Eberhart are at: http://www.mdusd.org/boe/Pages/default.aspx

  • Hell Freezing Over

    Emailing trustees is futile.

    Email sent on August 5, 2012 to one trustee has been ignored completely. No response what so ever.

    Previously a series of emails sent to all five trustees during the school closure fiasco resulted in a what appeared to be an auto-response. No indication in the reply from the ONE trustee who responded that they even knew what the emails where about. Basically a “Thanks for emailing” with no follow up after that.

  • Theresa Harrington

    While emailing may not result in action, it does let trustees know that people are concerned enough to write. So, it could help put issues on their radar.

  • Doctor J

    I suggest you TEXT GARY — especially during Board meetings since he admits he reads them during the meetings ! (925) 304-1546

  • http://www.k12reboot.com Jim

    Theresa — Sherry prefers emails because they are easier to ignore. Public comments are tedious because she has to listen to things that she cannot comprehend or that are unpleasant to hear (perhaps while mentally plugging her ears and singing “La, la, la…” to herself). Plus, during a public comment, she has to keep her eye on the clock for a full two minutes, so that she can jump in at the (in)appropriate time to remind the speaker to “Wrap it up!”

  • g

    Gary’s most recent ‘known’ email address:

    mr.eberhart@gmail.com

    Not that he cares about anything except himself, but you can at least get it on the record–emails can be subpoenaed….

    Sherry does not give more weight to emails. In three years she has never responded to a single one I’ve sent—even the polite ones–(and they have my name on them). She may read them (to see if they’re complimentary of her), she may even count them (to weigh her popularity).

    Other than that, she just uses the lack of emails as an excuse.

  • Theresa Harrington

    Here’s an analysis of Prop. 38 by the California Budget Project, which raises questions about the idea of earmarking funds for specific programs, while the state could reduce funds in other areas, which could result in no more money to spend overall: http://cbp.org/pdfs/2012/120907_Proposition_38_BB.pdf

  • http://www.k12reboot.com Jim

    @15 — Thank you, Theresa, for that excellent summary of Prop 38. The requirement for districts to report funding and spending by school site would be welcome, but as we learned during the CVCHS debate, that is something that has proved impossible for MDUSD to do. (MDUSD officials may want to be careful what they wish for in supporting this measure…)

    As far as curing that long-standing Sacramento habit of using new “dedicated” funds to reduce general fund support for schools (yielding higher taxes, but no net gain in school funding), I would not be optimistic that Prop 38 will close that spending loophole. It looks as if there are plenty of ways to use Prop 38 money to replace existing funding (depending how “the courts decide”). And of course, with Prop 38 funding available, the legislature can avoid the normal increases in education spending that would otherwise occur over time with inflation and the (eventual) recovery of the state’s economy. Like the “dedicated” lottery money that was supposed to save our schools, Prop 38 will just free up funds that legislators can then spend on other things closer to their hearts (and re-election campaigns).

  • Doctor J

    Do Board trustees receive cell phone stipends from the district like other management does ?

  • Doctor J

    Sorry, I meant to post this under the Strategic Plan topic: Lawrence, Eberhart & Whitmarsh wasted tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars by not implementing the travel ban, cell phone ban, and trinket ban as I called for two years ago. Gov. Brown set the example and it paid off. Instead Lawrence had his contract extended with illegal automatic pay increases, and Eberhart and Whitmarsh continued their FULL FAMILY medical dental and vision benefits by being on the Board while cutting employees time and benefits. http://www.sacbee.com/2012/09/06/4794914/california-saves-85m-under-jerry.html

  • Theresa Harrington

    I believe Whitmarsh said she doesn’t receive full benefits. Eberhart and Mayo do, as I recall.

  • Terri

    Changing the subject. Does anyone out there care about buses for general ed students. We live near Cowell and Ygnacio Vlly Rd. and getting to Valle Verde and Foothill and Northgate is crazy. We had buses we paid for a few years ago. NHTSA finds bus travel is the safest way to transport kids to school.Why doesn’t the MDUSD care about our kids safety!!

  • Doctor J

    The entire Board is eligible for FULL FAMILY MDV benefits at PUBLIC TAXPAYER expense.

  • g

    It seems to me that those big 5/4 contract extensions with their automatic increases are still just as illegal as they were the day the board voted for them.

    When are they going to correct the provisions on the contracts and provide updated copies to the public?

  • Doctor J

    How can they change the terms of the contracts that were approved ? If they are illegal, they are invalid.

  • Doctor J

    Seth’s Law went into effect July 1, 2012 — two months ago. When is Rolen going to get the district in compliance ? Wow, the Board actually has to adopt a procedure. Check it out at: https://www.aclunc.org/issues/lgbt/asset_upload_file529_10688.pdf

  • g

    You are correct Dr. J. Those contracts are illegal, which automatically makes them invalid. Without a revocation, rewrite and re-vote leaving out the automatic increase provisions I don’t see how they could be upheld.

    The question is, who is going to do anything about it? Ahhh, the new board will be able to declare the contracts invalid at about the same time we voters declare Whitmarsh incompetent.

  • soooo frustrated

    Doctor J and G: Do you really think you are doing anything positive with your blog comments? As has been mentioned before, there has been talk of the district being transparent and you pontificate on it when they are not. Yet in all the time you have been writing, you have not had the guts to say who you really are. Blogs seem to be just a way for unknown people to spout their ideas.

    Just wondering if either of you have jobs and/or families and whether your employer or family members mind that you spend such a significant amount of time tearing down MDUSD.

  • SP

    #6 Anon,
    Sorry, but you clearly are unaware of the gravity of this issue and how it impacts those who are affected.
    MDUSD employees who are traumatized by daily harassment from their administrators and who are retaliated against when they speak out will have a very difficult time telling their story in a public forum, especially when they will be potentially subjected to more attacks and intimidation from MDUSD officials or others who do not believe them or who want to silence them. This does not even address the fact that they would have to face their tormentors at their school sites the next day, only to bear the brunt of more retaliation.
    To say that these people should organize parents themselves and then “if no one shows up, there is no issue” is naive. Staff members know parents who are aware that this is occurring, but these parents are unwilling to speak up, because they do not want their children to be negatively impacted by administrators that they know to be vindictive.
    In order for this issue to come to light, someone needs to care enough to investigate it and uncover the ugly underbelly of our administrations and district office. The board is aware that this is taking place, but they will not act until it is exposed, most likely from an outside entity, like a newspaper willing to do the footwork.
    MDEA is aware of it, but they too have let our leaders off the hook.

  • http://www.k12reboot.com Jim

    #26 Sooo — What business is it of yours whether someone else is spending too much time writing on this blog? Why wonder? Don’t visit if it bothers you. The only ones “tearing down the district” are a small number of breathtakingly incompetent people in the Dent Center and on the Board.

    No one needs to “tear down” this distict. It is “falling down” quite well enough on its own, thank you. We are witnessing a civic disaster in MDUSD, and all of us who have children in these schools, and pay for these schools, ought to be darned concerned about it.

  • SP

    #26-
    Just because there “has been talk of the district being transparent” does not make it so.
    Unless you want to shove things under the rug too, why would it be a problem that Doctor J and G are shedding the light on what is really going on? Attacking them for trying to make a difference in an area that is important to them is troubling.
    That is what forums like these are for.

  • g

    @26 Sooo: Yes! While there is a very long way to go, and it is all up-hill in this flailing district, a lot of issues have been brought out into the bright lights.

    Few may blog, but many read! Thanks to Theresa and what we have brought out here, there is one stalwart board member standing up for the causes we’ve brought to bear.

    Hopefully, come November, there will be two new board members! I feel certain that we have influenced the decision of one dictator to forego this election!

    Under new control and without the back-room partnership of Eberhart/Rolen, perhaps the directions given and the entire leaning of staff will be reshaped.

    We can continue to hope!

    As to spending so much time to “tear down” the district–think about it.

    Corruption, ignorance, waste and neglect caused this district to decay from the inside out.

    When the foundation has turned to rubble and the roof has already caved in, the only recourse is to “tear down” and rebuild from the ground up.

    We are the wrecking crew.

    We are calling for a strong NEW leadership to rebuild.

  • Theresa Harrington

    Dr. J and G: Trustee Cheryl Hansen pointed out that the contracts were not updated and asked to see the new contracts before voting, but the rest of the board apparently didn’t think that was necessary. The last time I asked the superintendent’s secretary about the contracts, she said they still had not been updated.
    So, technically, the board never approved the new contracts. They just approved contract extensions, without discussing the specifics.
    If the district is truly interested in transparency, it should bring the new contracts back to the board for approval and public discussion, when they are finally updated.

  • g

    What are the chances that no one on the Board, nor the Superintendent, nor General Council have seen the Nov. 2011 bulletin from one of their own contracted legal firms? I would say that chance is highly unlikely.

    http://www.fagenfriedman.com/newsflash.php?nf=318

    What are the chances they thought the public would not see that bulletin, or read AB1344 for themselves, and so would never realize that the Board vote for those “extensions” is completely invalid? Very likely.

    Rolen, Lawrence and clan–they are working under the same contracts they had six months ago–and they expire June 30, 2013–Period

  • soooo frustrated

    What’s interesting to me is how several years ago bloggers were trying to get rid of the previous board members and were positive getting rid of some of the previous board members and the superintendent were the answer to everything. Then it was Gary and Sherry were the answer to everything. I’d like to know what makes the few who blog here experts, and some people will never be happpy no matter who serves on the board.

  • Theresa Harrington

    Soooo frustrated: What frustrates many people is lack of transparency in MDUSD. If the board and district administrators released information 72 hours in advance of meetings and shared everything with the public that is shared with the board, and publicly noticed meetings such as the CAC and the elusive facilities subcommittee 72 hours in advance online with staff reports attached — there would be less frustration with the decision-making process.
    If the superintendent and board president continue to quash some items from ever showing up on the agenda and the general counsel refuses to allow the board to discuss them because they’re not on the agenda, then some items never see the light of day and the public is left with the impression that the superintendent, board president, general counsel and a few other trustees and administrators are making decisions without public disclosure or input.
    Also, I have heard concerns about personnel issues that are not resolved by the personnel department. But, employees are afraid to speak on the record about these things.
    Jessica Preciado said she spoke up in the hopes that the culture in MDUSD would change and become more supportive of staff and students.

  • Anon

    Soooo frustrated

    This blog is not about bloggers or complainers. This blog is about kids and their education and safety. Can we do better for the kids? This year the answer is yes.

    And P.S. you should have read that it seems unanimous we are happy with Cheryl Hansen on the board.

  • Anon

    @ SP 27 – Comments were directed at comments on busing and the lack of concern from the District on 9/6.

    Your comments were in agreement with 1 & 2. The rest of your comments lead me to believe the unions are not there representing their employees. So teachers don’t have much choice but to go to the board. If I were a teacher, I would ask what is my union doing for me and my situation?

    Sherry publicly made the comment that since she did not receive an email on a specific issue, there was no issue according to her, and I believe Eberhart agreed. This is how this board operates, they do not do what is best for for the students. It now appears the district does not treat employees with compassion or fairness.

    Parents need to mobilize and bring the issues to the board. Unfortunately, it may also be the only way for teachers/employees to bring their issues forward due to the lack of representation by their unions. Not sure, but I always thought, growing up in a union family, that the point of a union is to protect their members?

  • Theresa Harrington

    Anon: The union is working to help Preciado, but Guy Moore and Executive Director Mark York told me they had hit a brick wall with Bryan Richards and Julie Braun-Martin until Preciado took her case to the board. Since then, Preciado said Superintendent Steven Lawrence has also visited her to try to find out what happened at MDHS. A union rep will be meeting with Preciado and Bryan Richards on Monday, I believe.

  • Anon

    Thanks, Theresa. What a class act we have at MDUSD.

  • anonymous 5

    At MDHS there has been a turnover of administrators (3). Were they tired of having to toe the McClatchy line? Most recently the principal blamed the teachers who disagreed with her with lower CST scores. Likewise, she said that staff development time that should have been used to improve teaching was wasted on communication sessions. These sessions would not have been necessary if she provided positive leadership and listened to concerns. Jessica Preciado is just one example of the poorly teated teachers.

  • anonymous 5

    #39 “treated” teachers

  • Doctor J

    Why pay more taxes when schools waste tax money by the hundreds of thousands ? Tonight, another $62,000 consultant for Meadow Homes [9.17], are you kidding me ? Lawrence is dripping these consultant contracts out one per meeting so they don’t look “too big” and we don’t realize they are really what we hired the SASS staffers to do — interestingly they are all done about the same time, but split up into various contracts instead of being presented as a package. Back on June 25 we paid $250,000 plus to hire consultants from Solution Tree to “train” SASS to teach principals and staffs. On August 27 [Agenda 9.8], we hired a $60,000 consultant for Meadown Homes to teach the staff, what we just hired a consultant to train SASS staffers to teach to Meadow Homes staff — government redundancy at its worst. Now tonight, Sept 10, another $62,000 consultant to train Meadow Homes staff to do more of what we paid Solution Tree to teach to SASS so SASS could teach the schools ? What ever happened to the original proposal back in May 2010 of SASS being composed of successful principals who could coach and teach schools to be successful ? How many more consultants are there going to be ? Everyone of these consultants is paid with TAXPAYER dollars. Why would any sane taxpayer just keep voting more tax dollars for schools when the tax dollars are wasted on consultant after consultant ? Don’t our administrators already know how to be successful ?

  • Wait a Minute

    The answer to that Dr J is no when it comes to Stevie Lawrence or Greg Rolen and their select group of adminstrators thye protect and promote (think Bill Morones, Kate McClatchy, etc–all people with NO HISTORY OF SUCCESS ANYWHERE!

    Why does Stevie and Greg do this, because they back up his asinine policies and look the other way at their corruption.

    Tell your friends, VOTE NO ON WHITMARSH!!!

  • Theresa Harrington

    Dr. J: This Meadow Homes contract is for $2,500 per day — making the contract for $900 a day approved last time a bargain: http://esb.mdusd.k12.ca.us/attachments/cdc3bcfc-9391-4274-99c6-84b5cde54e89.pdf.

  • Theresa Harrington

    It looks like SunPower is hoping to attract homeowners to purchase their solar panels by offering to donate $500 back to MDUSD — $250 to UMDAF and $250 to Project Lead the Way: http://esbpublic.mdusd.k12.ca.us/public_itemview.aspx?ItemId=5806&mtgId=348

  • Doctor J

    Gary was more interested last night in the Raider’s score than the so-called “strategic plan”. At least the Raider’s kept it interesting for 15 minutes. How anyone will think this is a “Strategic Plan” when it was dropped 7 months ago and just picked up — handing colored dots out to the public and mostly staff to “prioritize” the goals. Where is the tough back and forth discussions from “all stakeholders” that a strategic plan formation requires ? What a joke. And then Lawrence found a way that the agenda does not reflect the board votes last night so everyone is in the dark the morning after.

  • Doctor J

    Morning after quiz for Sherry: What successful company says this about their “Strategic Plan” ? “Our Strategic Plan sets direction, aligns our organization, and differentiates us from the competition. It guides our actions to successfully manage risk and deliver shareholder value.” http://www.hark.com/clips/fmrtczkldg-final-jeopardy-music [I know you are unfamiliar with this company's strategic plan based on your lack of knowledge and understanding of what a Strategic Plan really is as shown by your comments.]
    Perhaps this next clue will help you: ask yourself, could any of these type VALUES be included in the MDUSD Strategic Plan ?
    Enterprise Strategies
    People
    Invest in people to strengthen organizational capability and develop a talented global workforce that gets results the right way
    Execution
    Execute with excellence through rigorous application of our operational excellence and capital stewardship systems and disciplined cost management
    Growth
    Grow profitably by using our competitive advantages to maximize value from existing assets and capture new opportunities
    Major Business Strategies
    Upstream
    Grow profitably in core areas and build new legacy positions
    Gas and Midstream
    Commercialize our equity gas resource base while growing a high-impact global gas business
    Downstream and Chemicals
    Improve returns and grow earnings across the value chain
    Technology
    Differentiate performance through technology
    Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency
    Invest in profitable renewable energy and energy efficiency solutions
    Sorry Sherry, “Beulah the Buzzer” just sounded. You lost. I am talking about the Chevron Strategic Plan — no wonder you didn’t recognize it — you work for them ! You might learn something from Strategic Plans by reading them — because from last night it doesn’t appear you have.

  • Theresa Harrington

    I believe the votes aren’t showing up because they did roll call votes, since Dennler was in Hawaii.
    Nearly everything passed unanimously. The only exceptions were: There was no motion on Prop. 30 and the board split its vote to endorse Prop. 38 3-1-1 with Hansen voting no and Dennler abstaining.
    Also, items 15.6 and 15.7 were pulled from the agenda and not discussed.
    The only controversial item was the superintendent’s evaluation item 15.14, with Hansen and Eberhart at loggerheads.

  • Theresa Harrington

    Here’s a California Budget Project analysis of Prop. 30: http://cbp.org/pdfs/2012/120911_Proposition_30_BB.pdf

  • SR
  • Theresa Harrington

    Another question is what will the board do with the dots after they are received? At the Monday community session, there was zero discussion of the “input.”