Part of the Bay Area News Group

MDUSD live blog of 3-11-13 meeting

By Theresa Harrington
Monday, March 11th, 2013 at 6:39 pm in Education, Mt. Diablo school district.

During its special meeting earlier this evening, the board voted 4-1 to direct staff to review its policy related to responding to Public Records Act requests and to come back with recommendations for openness. Trustee Linda Mayo voted against the motion, saying she believed it was out of order, since it wasn’t on the agenda as an action item.

The board then voted 3-2 to authorized Board President Cheryl Hansen and Vice President Barbara Oaks to contract with an outside attorney to review the documents that General Counsel Greg Rolen withheld from Contra Costa Times columnist Dan Borenstein.

In closed session, trustees discussed negotiations and readmitted two students, and admitted one student to MDUSD, and discussed expulsions.

Board is voting on expulsions. General Counsel Greg Rolen just entered the meeting.
Motion carried 4-1.

Here is a link to the agenda:

Board is voting on second expulsion. Motion carried 5-0.

Did not discuss public employee discipline and dismissal, but there was a board discussion regarding a response to a uniform complaint and board took action on that item.

Consent calendar:
Hansen pulls 10.2 (minutes of Jan. 28 meeting) and Lawrence pulls 10.12 (adjustments to position control for 2013-14).
Motion to approve all other items passes 5-0.

10.2 Hansen moves to approve minutes with amendment on page 7 under public comment by Ron Hansen, remove the word “not” in sentence about board is legally or morally obligated to approve contracts.
Lawrence seconded.
Carries 5-0.

10.12 Adjustments to position control
Public comment by Willie Mims: pg 2 of 4, assist. supt. on special assignment. Who is this person? If he or she was on special assignment, when was last date. Another position is being created that appears to be replacing that person. Who was this person on special assignment and when was this person’s last date of employment?

Braun-Martin says Mildred Browne was on a leave of absence and that was the assist. supt. on special assignment and interim assist. supt. Kerri Mills has been acting in that position. She said positions can be brought back with categorical funding in the spring.

Carmen Terrones, Local One CST Unit President: I have a few concerns for my members. The interim assist. supt. for special ed. services is being eliminated, so the current person is being placed into the position. Has she been evaluated? Once again, we are paying an assist. supt. on leave her regular salary and we are also paying more money for an interim assist. supt. The message we receive is we are hiring more administrators at higher salaries, but classified employees get nothing. It’s not fair. (Applause).

Supt. Lawrence says evaluation of Mills is supposed to be conducted in May. The position is budgeted as a place-holder for next year.

Braun-Martin says district has until end of May to do administrator evaluations, but paperwork can be turned into personnel in June.

Bryan Richards says position is being budgeted with no person assigned to it.
Motion carries 5-0. Greg Rolen walks back into the board meeting.

12.1 Public Comment:

1. Willie Mims: Complains about how cold the board room was during the last regular meeting. Says board agendas need to be streamlined. He says the board should not take up all the people’s time with long reports. Says trustees repeat themselves too much when they are trying to make their points, making circular arguments. “You go round and round, but you’re not moving forward. You should not waste the people’s time by repeating the same language. I’ve been watching this board for some time and until there’s a positive working relationship between all of you, you’re not going anywhere. Streamline your agenda, because the people should not have to be here until 12:30 (a.m.), and then freezing too.”

13.1 District Organizations

1. Ernie De Trinidad: Says tonight is a special night for DELAC, which is pleased to see the English Learner Master Plan, which will improve services and help the district reach its goals. Urges board to approve the master plan.

Hansen praises the work of Jeanne Duarte-Armas, Rose Lock and others involved in the creation of the plan.

No superintendent report.

15.1 Amended contract for Rose Lock: Oaks praises Lock. Dennler and Mayo apologize for what she’s had to go through.

15.2 Contract for Julie Braun-Martin: Oaks compliments Braun-Martin on her hiring and retaining of employees.

15.3 Amended contract for CFO Bryan Richards:
Willie Mims: says Lock represents color and he also supports Richards. Says district should work toward diversity.

Hansen: I have some concerns about the current state of our fiscal services dept, including lack of oversight, security and accountability, so I will be giving this contract some serious thought as we move forward to March 25.

Dennler: What do you mean?

Hansen: This board has to take action on these contracts. Last April, I asked that this vote be postponed until the new board was seated and I did not get a second. I asked that it be delayed and it was rushed through in April. The idea was those contracts had to be revised and cleaned up and at this point, this current board must take action on these contracts and this current board is entitled to vote any way this current board wants to vote. Our names will be on these contracts. It is not a rubber-stamp situation. Today is not the time to go into how we might vote, but it’s to discuss concerns.

Dennler: These contracts are legal and the only thing we will be doing is cleaning them up. They are legal until 2014. That’s what we were thinking in January when we voted and now all of a sudden we’re talking about new contracts.

(NOTE: Video of the remaining conversation will be uploaded to

15.4 Amended contract for General Counsel Greg Rolen:
Hansen: I’ve brought Exhibit A for review.

Oaks: I’ve been on this board a few months and have found there is a lot of controversy, which I didn’t expect. Morale is extremely low. There’s a lack of trust and I think it’s time to seek new leadership.

Hansen: I will not support this contract.

15.5 Amended contract for Superintendent Steven Lawrence:

Classified union rep Debbie Hickey: I’m disheartened by district leadership and lack of responsiveness from this board. It is disheartening to know we are not getting any support.

Hansen: I think enough is enough. It’s time for new leadership. We need a superintendent who builds trust. We need to cut our losses. I’ve heard from so many staff about the need for change.

15.6 FCMAT report on special education
CAC Chairwoman Lorrie Davis voiced many concerns about the recommendations, followed by CAC parents Dorothy Weisenberger and Denise Lambert, who also expressed concerns about the recommendations.
District resident Willie Mims expressed concerns about why the district invited FCMAT to create a report in the first place.

FCMAT staff presented report and board agreed to bring back in March 25.

15.7 Questions on FCMAT report
Carmen Terrones, Local 1 union rep: It’s my understanding there was a draft and the recommendations were slightly different from what’s presented. CI would like to know if Dr. (Mildred) Browne was part of this study, because some of the recommendations, I can’t see that they would come from Dr. Browne. My members are concerned about more upper management and the draft being a bit different. It makes us wonder how trustworthy higher management is.

Hansen: I did see a draft. It was different. Hopefully we can build a culture of trust and make sure we’re forthright about the info.

I will continue blog tomorrow.

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

175 Responses to “MDUSD live blog of 3-11-13 meeting”

  1. MDEA Educator Says:

    The inevitable departure of Lawrence and Rolen should occur as soon as possible. The district needs to begin a healing and rebuilding process as soon as possible and finding the new leadership to begin is of utmost importance. Lawrence and Rolen are so compromised that to keep them on would be both an insult to the public intelligence and pocketbooks. It is very telling, and baffling, why those two, knowing how unpopular and untenable their positions are, would not simply submit their resignations and allow us to move forward. Obviously, their own self interests and egos supercede any sense of the district good. I would urge the public and our unions to attend the March 25 meeting and support Oaks, Brian Lawrence, and Hansen in bringing MDUSD new leadership.

  2. Theresa Harrington Says:

    MDEA Ed: Brian Lawrence did not comment during the contract discussions, so it’s unclear whether he ages with Hansen and Oaks.
    G: I have sent a PRA to Rolen and Braun-Martin asking for all documents, including any settlement agreement, related to the creation of the assist supt on special assignment position.

  3. g Says:

    Since we were not given a copy of Mildred Browne’s contract on April 23 (not being renewed) we can only assume at this point that she had a valid contract through 6/30/13 like the rest of them.

    The real question is not why did they choose to not include her in the renewals, although the public would certainly like to know. The real question is why would they keep her under a paid contract–if she requested the leave? Where in any of the Big 5,6 contracts does it say they can take off 9 months ‘with pay’ as long as they drop in once in a while–and we’ll hire another full time–full pay person to do your job for you?

    It was said that she would still be performing ‘some’ duties. What would that be–shadowing Mary Montell Bacon on the speaker’s circuit? Dropping in on the occasional Equity Advisory Staff meeting for lunch?

  4. Doctor J Says:

    Maybe we need a “cure and correct” on Mildred Browne in order to get to the truth. It appears there has been a Brown Act violation that we have not been told about.

  5. g Says:

    No, Brian Lawrence did not comment about the contracts ‘this time’. His previous comment that said something to the effect of “these people count on their employment, we owe them their jobs, we have a responsibility to them”—whatever!

    He was wrong.

    They may wish they could count on us going ahead with the old Ebermarsh buddy system, but we do not OWE them their jobs, and any RESPONSIBILITY we may have for them should be in direct proportion to their job performance.

    If Lawrence and Rolen still have a job July 1, it should be at a greatly reduced salary. Neither has warranted a salary increase.

    The board should negate all existing Big 5 contracts, and, if so inclined, offer new contracts to some executive staff that are more in alignment with proven performance.

    Look at the AYPs Dr J referenced this morning! With all the increased score accomplishments of SIG schools, the district overall only gained 7 points—that means we are going backwards! Losses due to poor choices in teachers and administration staff far outweighed improvements; we are in year 2 of PI—

    Ah, but that’s OK, as long as we will be able to pay our bills and keep bringing in outside consultants to do what the ‘$100,000.00+, 75 member, high roller staff club’ should be able to accomplish on their own.

  6. Theresa Harrington Says:

    On another topic, here are a couple of photos from the district’s science fair:

  7. Theresa Harrington Says:

    And here’s a cute story about a knitting club at Pleasant Hill MS:

  8. Anon Says:

    The Board does not owe anyone any jobs; the Board owes the community the best leadership and educational opportunities for its children. Brian Lawrence should be reminded of that obligation.

    G. Note that graduation rates dropped in 2012 despite the fact the MDUSD has the fewest graduation credit requirements in the area. Again, a failure of leadership.

  9. Theresa Harrington Says:

    On the topic of leadership, I attended a media briefing today about the governor’s proposed Local Control Funding Formula, where all three panelists agreed that the current proposal would give much more power to school boards and superintendents, with few accountability requirements. One panelist said this will require trustees who are intelligent and more involved. It will also mean that parents will have to become stronger advocates for programs that are important to them, since the district will be able to spend money however it wants, instead of according to mandates from Sacramento, panelists agreed. They also cautioned that districts such as MDUSD, which has some wealthier schools and some poorer schools, will receive money for the entire district instead of earmarked for specific schools. They worried that money that is supposed to help English learners and poor students could end up being redirected districtwide to fund administrative and teacher raises, or anything else the board and superintendent designate. Local control will make public watchdogs even more essential, since Sacramento won’t be watching as closely as it does now, after it writes the checks, panelists said.

  10. Wendy Lack Says:

    @ #58 Anon:

    As per Dr J’s comment at #40, the District isn’t an employment agency.

    You are correct that the Board of Trustees’ primary duty is to those who subsidize and reside in the District area.

    Trustees who defend and extend employment contracts for the current Supt, Chief Legal Counsel and CFO should expect to face recall.

    @ MDEA Educator #51:

    “It is very telling, and baffling, why those two, knowing how unpopular and untenable their positions are, would not simply submit their resignations and allow us to move forward.”

    Precisely. The Board of Trustees should be seeking to negotiate exit arrangements but, if the incumbents are unwilling to go quietly, then the District may face legal challenge from their own administrators.

    When the pressure’s on, one’s true colors show.

  11. Brian Lawrence Says:


    You are misquoting me and it is an important distinction. I never stated that the Board or the District owes anyone a job. I believe that every single person has to earn their job every single day.

    I said that the Board needed to be mindful that our actions affected the lives and careers of five individual as well as the District as a whole.

    I’ll certainly be sharing my full views on March 25th.

  12. Theresa Harrington Says:

    Brian, Thanks for making that distinction. You are showing how a trustee can comment on blogs responsibly, without revealing how you intend to vote, which might violate the Brown Act if two other trustees saw or heard about it.

  13. Theresa Harrington Says:

    Dr. J: Re your comment on retirees working in SASS, FCMAT also noticed that the special ed dept hires lots of retirees and recommended against that. It also recommended taking a closer look at translator services to be sure they’re cost-efficient. I wonder if they looked at Padilla’s contract. FCMAT wrote: “Contact the company that provides Real Time Translation to determine whether a trial group can be established so that the district can determine if this type of program is cost and program effective.”

  14. Theresa Harrington Says:

    Here’s a new blog post that raises the idea of electing trustees according to geographic locations instead of in districtwide elections:

  15. Anon Says:

    I sure hope Brian Lawrence stands strong with Oaks and Hansen. This would certainly proove to me that I may have been wrong about him.
    Lawrence and Rolen and Richards need to go. I know everyone praised the other two but I don’t care for them.
    I also hope that they think long and hard about special education. What they are doing now is leaving many behind and if they don’t make the right changes we will leave all behind.

  16. Wait a Minute Says:

    Yes Brian, it will come down to you.

    I pray that you will represent the good of the vast majority of long suffering students, parents and staffs instead of the corrupt interests of the very few.

    Please, please turn that page Brian.

  17. Doctor J Says:

    Steven Lawrence, Greg Rolen and Bryan Richards have to decide what is best for their own careers. The choice is theirs. Do they withdraw their contract extension requests or hurt their careers by having a public discussion about their poor performances ? While to most of us it seems like an easy choice, to a narcissistic person, it becomes almost self destructive. We already know how two of the board trustees feel since they voiced it in open session. Linda Mayo and Brian Lawrence as of now are fence sitters — a year ago Linda Mayo tried to carve off Greg Rolen’s contract, but more recently has showed a different intent. Lynee Dennler continues to be more focused on her joint school visits with Linda Mayo than she is on how the district is run at large. For example, Lynne think how many projector bulbs could have been purchased with the $100,000 laptop loss by Bryan Richards and the February “penalties and interest” which is more than %5,000 for Bryan’s late payment of employment taxes. I just can’t wait until Greg McCoy shows up on the 25th and the Board gets to ask him about HIS conflict of interest in being paid as a district lawyer in December and then in January representing the BIG5.

  18. g Says:

    Brian, thank you for responding publicly. I believe it is important for the public to put its arguments out there for the public as well.

    Thanks to Theresa’s Youtube tapes (since board audio is garbled and cut out before you spoke) I am able to reflect what you said.

    “Five educational professionals made decisions about their career plans and their lives based on those extensions, and we have a legal and moral obligation to honor those extensions.”

    Nice in moral theory, but I disagree in the legal theory.

    I found your reference to the old “who’s job is it, anyway?” Marbury v. Madison confusing to this issue in light of more recent cases that actually deal with Boards of Education findings on issues much the same as what we have here.

    1) JOSE R. NEGRON v. Board of Education Borough of South Plainfield…2011. Mr Negron lost his case and further appealed to the ALJ that his contract was not renewed in a proper manner where, by the time it went for judicial review the court stated …

    “…that even if the vote had gone [Negron’s] way…”

    “…the current board has no authority to authorize an employment action which would begin during the tenure of a different board.” And they cited a Gonzalez case.

    Negron then appealed to the State Commissioner who said the reference to the Gonzalez case was correct and further stated:

    “…boards of education do not have the statutory authority to approve appointments or contractual extensions if they are to take effect at a date beyond the current board’s natural lifetime; the contract extension in the instant case was to commence more than two months after the 2011 board was elected, and accordingly was void.”

    Brian, ‘our’ extensions were to take effect eight months after the election, and a year before such a decision needed to be made.

    2) The referenced Gonzalez case:

    Gonzalez v. Elizabeth School District. The case began in 1999, Supt. Gonzalez lost. Gonzalez appealed, lost again and it went to the State Supreme Court.

    By that time the case hinged on just one thing: Whether one school board may “bind the hands” of the next board in deciding whom it wants to hire. That Supreme court stated:

    “The central issue raised by this appeal is whether a local school board is empowered to appoint a superintendent whose term would begin during the term of office of the succeeding board.”

    The Supreme Court said NO, and upheld the decision of the lower courts.

    One board may not bind the hands of a succeeding board. Neither should your opinion of moral obligation.

  19. Frustrated Says:

    Why don’t the 5 experts who continue to write on this blog run for School Board? You seem to have all the answers. Talk is cheap. Why not step up?

  20. anon Says:


    Speaking of the Brown Act, how is your Brown Act investigation going related to the 3/11/13 board meeting?


    Do you believe that the board violated the Brown Act when they voted on items which were not on the agenda? Especially the vote where the board voted to give the board president and vice-president the authority to hire an outside attorney and expend the public’s money.

  21. Wait a Minute Says:

    I wonder if Anon#70, 32 isn’t Greg Rolen himself hypocritically wanting to apply a different standard to his critics then to his own follies.

    And I do mean hypocritically since I NEVER saw anything agendized about hiring Greg MCCoy to defend the Big 5 or ANYTHING about giving Mildred Brown a paid absence of leave while simultaneously hiring Kerri Mills to do her job?

  22. Doctor J Says:

    @Anon#70 I guess you can file your cure and correct letter if you want.

  23. Wait a Minute Says:

    Dr J#72, LMAO!!!

  24. Anon Says:

    @70 Better yet, tell Greg to call his friends at the DA office and make a complaint.

  25. Theresa Harrington Says:

    Anon: As Dr. J states, if a Brown Act violation occurred, any member of the public (or even Trustee Linda Mayo herself) could file a Cure and Correct letter. One possible correction would be to agendize the item and re-vote. But, since it is already clear what the outcome of that vote would be, it’s questionable whether anyone will go to the trouble of forcing the issue.

    On another topic, I happened to bump into the superintendent this morning at Meadow Homes Elementary, where I was interviewing some parents about their new “walking school bus” program (which the superintendent said he didn’t know about). When I asked him how the liability issue was resolved for the Ayers crossing guards, he basically admitted that it wasn’t. The district is essentially taking a wait and see approach, hoping that no serious accidents occur. “We’re hoping that through the training and working with the Concord Police Department that we’re minimizing any risk,” he said. “And we continue to work with the city around issues of liability.”

  26. Doctor J Says:

    It wouldn’t surprise me if Cheryl and Barbara have already hired the outside counsel. This is no time for Greg Rolen to drag his feet in getting the documents to the outside counsel. If he does, it will not bode well for him on the 25th. I expect that Cheryl will have the outside counsel’s opinion by the 25th and it will be the subject of disclosure prior to the contract votes. One tidbit came to my memory about the April 23, 2012 vote — Sherry Whitmarsh in defending the sudden vote, made a statement that they had been waiting for a certain unnamed event to occur to put them on the agenda. I wonder if that is contained in the emails ?

  27. Theresa Harrington Says:

    I was very surprised that Rolen said he had asked trustees and senior managers for emails related to the contracts, but he didn’t mention the superintendent’s secretary. If he neglected to ask for her emails, that would be a HUGE oversight, since she likely has emails from her to him asking for direction related to the drafts and email from Rolen or someone else directing her to remove the clause from the superintendent’s contract. Also, it’s possible that she emailed Eberhart, Whitmarsh, Mayo and Dennler to let them know that the contracts were ready to be signed. Hansen has said she was never asked to sign the contracts until after she was elected president of the board, when Mayo handed them to her in a file folder.
    I hope that when the board reviews the emails Rolen collected, they specifically look for emails to and from the superintendent’s secretary and ask for them if they are missing.

  28. Doctor J Says:

    Perhaps the outside counsel will ask Joe to do a server search to make sure no one is withholding emails.

  29. Theresa Harrington Says:

    Brian Lawrence also appears to have a lot of expertise related to computer tech. Perhaps he will ask Rolen why his attempt to collect emails for the PRA was not comprehensive.

  30. Doctor J Says:

    I am posting an edited version of Theresa’s blog on the contracts posted April 23, 2012 to explain this mysterious event — it also verifies there are emails back and forth regarding the contracts which need to be produced:

    In a previous interview, Board President Sherry Whitmarsh told me she did not put Hansen’s agenda item regarding the contracts on an agenda because she was waiting for a “milestone” — which had been discussed during a closed session regarding the superintendent’s evaluation — to pass.

    “When I brought that up (during closed session), she did not say anything,” Whitmarsh said of Hansen. “My undersgtanding was that Dr. Lawrence was talking to her about that. In the closed session — it was all board members in person — and we had talked about how contracts would be handled. It was not meant to go on the agenda until the milestone that I said would be hit.”

    . . . . .

    Hansen also said she was surprised that Whitmarsh was claiming she couldn’t put the contracts on an agenda until a milestone had been reached, since that was never reported out of closed session.

  31. Theresa Harrington Says:

    During open session, I believe Whitmarsh said she had been waiting for the board to complete the superintendent’s evaluation, which she said they had done in closed session. But, as Alicia Minyen pointed out in her Cure and Correct letter, if that is true, it was not done according to the timeline spelled out in the superintendent’s contract.

  32. Doctor J Says:

    Theresa, if I understood your posting correctly, it was some kind of “milestone” that was discussed during the Supt’s evaluation. Remember that evaluation went on for months and we found out later that Cheryl Hansen walked out of one session she said was a Brown Act violation for discussing district business under the ruse of “evaluation”. You already know that Eberhart and Mayo responded to a citizen letter concerning the subject so it will be interesting to see if those responses are included. No one has ever verified that Eberhart and Whitmarsh returned their district computers.

  33. Wait a Minute Says:

    Lies and more damn lies by last-place Chevron Sherry.

    The bottom line here is that the previous board majority/Rolen/Stevie Lawrence twisted all the facts and reality itself to fit their pre-planned strategy of extending contracts IN CASE THEY WEREN’T RE-ELECTED and in fact The Gary had already made up his mind to not run because of the heat coming down upon his collusions with Rolen, Lawrence, Measure C contracters, etc!

    Any rational person doing their to the real owners of the district would properly evaluate these clowns and find them performance to be completely un-satisfactory ANY MEASURES TAKEN and gracefully as possible usher them out the door.

  34. Doctor J Says:

    Also remember that Cheryl was attempting to get on the agenda her item to postpone consideration of any contract extension until after the election but was getting stonewalled by Steven Lawrence, Greg Rolen, and Sherry Whitmarsh. It was because Cheryl was pushing this that I believe they “rushed” the contract extensions on the agenda in their typical hap-hazzard manner. And now this new board is still cleaning up the mess.

  35. Theresa Harrington Says:

    On another topic, here’s a working paper that says private school enrollment is down, while charter enrollment is up nationwide:

    Coincidentally, when CVCHS was formed, many charter advocates said they didn’t want to keep losing students to Carondelet and De La Salle. Yet, district officials continue to insist local private schools are not taking students away from the district. Brian Lawrence, on the other hand, said the district needs to work harder to keep those students, during the strategic plan portion of the retreat.

  36. Wait a Minute Says:

    Of course Brian Lawrence and other trustees want to keep these students.

    The only way to do that is to replace the current incompetent and corrupted district senior management with highly competent and with ethics beyond reproach and then start to rebuild this district.

    Conversely, if these incompetent and corrupted people are allowed to stay for even one more year, the district will continue to implode and the people will lose even more faith in it and the exodus of students from it will continue.

  37. Theresa Harrington Says:

    On a positive note, the Kaiser liaison who is working in the Monument Community highly praised the principals of Meadow Homes and Cambridge, saying they are really building parent involvement in that area.

  38. Theresa Harrington Says:

    Regarding the Bay Point master plan meeting, our Bay Point reporter says the maps didn’t include street names and they were so small they were barely readable. She also said the consultant ran out of reports and told her to go to the website, without revealing that the website is completely separate from the district’s website. Why isn’t there a Bay Point Master Plan link on the MDUSD website? The Bay Point Master Plan website also wasn’t listed on the meeting notice. The public and press shouldn’t have to know about secret websites to get information about what is being planned.

  39. Doctor J Says:

    Secret committees = secret website. 🙂 What were you expecting “transparency” ? LOL

  40. Doctor J Says:

    CDE compares teacher salaries and benefits of MDUSD.!bottom=/_layouts/EdDataClassic/fiscal/TeacherSalary.asp?reportNumber=4096&level=06&fyr=1112&county=07&district=61754#teachersalaryschedule-annualsalary

  41. Doctor J Says:

    This Eddata site through CDE is amazing. Here is finance comparison of MDUSD with all other CCC districts. MDUSD appear to be very typical of the average district in Contra Costa.!bottom=/_layouts/EdDataClassic/finance/MC-FinanceResults.asp

  42. Theresa Harrington Says:

    I wonder if the Technology Committee and Graduation Requirements committee also have secret websites.

  43. Theresa Harrington Says:

    On another positive note, I happened across this video of a presentation of the Mayor’s Student Recognition Awards to Khalled Mahmoud, an 8th grade student at Pine Hollow Middle School, and to Dalhya Gomez, an 8th grade student at Oak Grove Middle School by Concord Mayor Helix when I went to the Concord City Council website to watch the police chief’s presentation on crossing guards (Item 1A):

  44. g Says:

    Theresa: Your (cat out of the bag) comment #15 on Tuesday, at 12:12pm apparently triggered the posting of the agenda for Bay Point. It was posted at 1:50pm on the 12th. I wonder if the BAC ‘insiders’ went to Bay Point too.

  45. Theresa Harrington Says:

    Actually, I had called Tim Cody and left a voicemail message for him, saying that I had previously asked Pete Pedersen to put me on his distribution list for Bay Point meeting notices, but didn’t find out about the meeting until it was forwarded to me by our Bay Point reporter, who received it in a forwarded email from Federal Glover’s office. I then reiterated my request to Tim, in Pedersen’s absence. I also said in my message that I didn’t understand why the meeting notice was not posted on the district’s website.

    Here is Cody’s emailed response:


    Thanks for your voice message earlier. I was unaware the Bay Point meeting was not posted, however based on your call, we were able to quickly rectify the problem.

    In reference to your notification, I apologize but your name was not on my CBOC or Bay Point list. Now that I have your e-mail, I intend to add you on future notifications.

    Thanks again for letting us know.

    TM Cody

  46. Theresa Harrington Says:

    On another topic, MDUSD gets good compliance review from Grand Jury (despite the fact that Greg Rolen routinely responds on behalf of the board without ever putting these on public agendas, in contrast to the open and transparent way most elected boards discuss and approve their responses):

  47. Wait a Minute Says:

    TH#96, regarding board compensation discussing health benefits (MDV) for board members when exactly did the MDUSD h their discussion on ????

    “Recommendation #3: As part of the public annual review discussed in Recommendation 1, districts that provide healthcare benefits should consider whether it is appropriate to provide such benefits to their elected board members.”

  48. Wait a Minute Says:

    Also, on recommendations regarding school bonds the MDUSD (I guess this was Rolen” call?) decided to NOT IMPLEMENT most of the GJ recommendations!

  49. Doctor J Says:

    As if the Board needed more reasons for not renewing Rolen’s contract — he thinks he can set Board policy.

  50. Theresa Harrington Says:

    FYI, here’s video from the meeting of the discussion of Rolen’s contract:

Leave a Reply