Comments on: MDUSD superintendent unveils test scores, but doesn’t mention district is in second year of federal Program Improvement

By: Theresa Harrington

Theresa Harrington — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:17:46 +0000

I’ll try to get to the Grand Jury responses later.
Regarding the alleged retaliation, I understand that other media outlets may be interested in this story as well.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:15:44 +0000

Retailiation in MDUSD ? Round up the usual suspects . . . . again. Awaiting a response from the Board ? The only way you get a response from this Board is to speak up at the Board meeting and have it hit the newspaper.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:44:01 +0000

While you are posting, can you also post the two Grand Jury responses by MDUSD

By: Theresa Harrington

Theresa Harrington — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:27:19 +0000

More proof: The Northgate fiasco several years ago and the Oak Grove whistle-blowing fiasco last year.
Speaking of that, I have heard from substitute Rebecca Richter that she believes the district is retaliating against her by removing her from the substitute list this year. She has contacted the board and is awaiting a response, I believe. Meanwhile, the Clayton Valley Charter is happy to have her as a sub, she says.

By: Theresa Harrington

Theresa Harrington — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:24:55 +0000

Unfortunately, the COE has not actually presented its analysis publicly. It was presented at a Clayton City Council meeting by Neil McChesney, but was not included in the agenda attachments or specifically noticed on the Clayton Council agenda. A copy of the analysis has also been given to Rep. George Miller.
It is based on budget documents submitted to the county and does not break down revenues and expenses the same way the district did in its analysis, so it’s a bit hard to compare on an apples to apples basis.
I will try to upload the documents to DocStoc and post them later.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:20:08 +0000

I raised the substitute costs issues earlier this year and believe several million dollars can be saved — I would love to see a breakout by school, but also by reason for the substitute– illness, personal necessity, training, conferences, etc. The fact of life is that when a substitute is in the class not much is learned: proof, Sun Terrace fiasco.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:15:40 +0000

TH, can you share the COE statement identified in #20 ? Then you can erase this post.

By: Doctor J

Doctor J — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:11:43 +0000

G, so right. A TAX dollar is a TAX dollar, whether you call it General Fund, Categorical or Bonds. It is paid by TAXPAYERS. The Feds put restrictions on SIG funds to prevent people like Steven Lawrence and Rose Lock from promising one thing and then not delivering — and Steven and Rose got caught by the auditors, and the Feds/State stopped the SIG money until Steven and Rose implemented the “Corrective Action Plan” on the SIG grants — look what happened when the Feds forced Steven and Rose to comply with the increased instructional time for children in the SIG schools: NEARLY A 150 API POINT JUMP in three elementary schools. Next year Steven and Rose will cut the increased instructional time in those SIG schools in favor of raises to themselves. And who puts “kids first” ? Its not Steven and Rose.

By: Theresa Harrington

Theresa Harrington — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:05:02 +0000

One area in which the district lacks accountability is in its failure to accurately code expenditures, so they all get lumped together as “centralized services.” This became apparent during the charter debate. In fact, the COE has come out with its own analysis that disputes the district’s accounting and says that instead of taking the lost revenues from other schools, the district should make centralized services cuts, since it is now serving nearly 2,000 fewer high school students and operating one less high school facility.
One area that Bryan Richards acknowledged needed improvement was accounting for substitutes. Instead of charging those to schools, he said, those expenses all show up in centralized services. This doesn’t give the public (or the board) an accurate picture of how much is being spent at each school site and how much all the data analysis days related to testing are costing the district (while also causing teachers to leave their students, with the potential for less effective instruction).
When I asked the board candidates if they would support a parcel tax, they agreed that one is needed. But, many said the district needs to rebuild community trust prove to the public that it is spending its money wisely, before they would consider asking voters to approve such a tax.
Meanwhile, other districts (that have the trust of their communities) are passing parcel taxes.

By: g

Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:55:35 +0000

General or categorical or bond–a dollar is a dollar and it comes out of our pockets, and is supposed to result in improved education for all students.

Trying to understand or justify Lawrence’s staff expenditures is like trying to untangle a Slinky!

I believe the answer to the problem lies in one word; “Un-accountability” at all levels, starting at the top.