December 6th School Committee Meeting

I am a bit late out of the gate on this, but I just finished watching the video of the December 6th School Committee meeting.  Other than again seeing proof throughout the Superintendent’s presentation that our district is not performing as well as surrounding districts and that our enrollment numbers continue to drop, I was most interested to see the manner in which the meeting ended.

Mr. Henderson included emails from every other committee member in the meeting packet.  His purpose was to inform the committee that those emails should also be included in the packet of other emails sent to the attorney for disbursement to the Attorney General for review regarding possible Open Meeting Law violations.

Remarkable to me that – after the original motion was read upon which the School Committee voted to provide emails “received by committee members” to the attorney for disbursement to the appropriate authorities – Mr. Henderson stated that he would [within the context of that prior vote] forward his packet of emails to the attorney for inclusion with the others, and the committee simply didn’t respond!

The animosity from Ms. Angelone was palpable, but without merit.  Mr. Henderson did not make the original motion.  But the original motion was made, seconded and favorably voted.  Ms. Angelone accused Mr. Henderson of stepping outside the boundaries of his authority if he chose to forward his emails to the attorney without a vote by the committee.

That’s what I call selective hearing, Ms. Angelone.  And the Chairman nor anyone else bothered to speak to the issue.

Bottom line:  Mr. Henderson, you appear to be well within your right to forward the emails you received from other committee members (which clearly evidence deliberative interaction outside of the public meeting requirements) and from what I gather, there is no need for the committee to have made another motion on the issue.

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.  The original motion was not worded to limit only the emails sent by Mr. Henderson to other members.  It stated that emails “received by committee members” were to be sent.  Unless there is more to the actual wording of that motion beyond what was read by the Chairman (and if there was, why would he not have included the full context of the vote?), no other motion need be made.  And Ms. Angelone’s way of coping was to hastily make a motion to adjourn the meeting before anything further could be clarified.

More immaturity, backbiting, nitpicking and continued witch hunting by certain members of the School Committee . . . how productive.

Advocate that students should come first

http://www.studentsfirst.org/page/s/put-students-first-video

This is an interesting video of TEACHERS who agree that we need reform in our schools and that it should be about students first.

What if every administrator and every school committee member stopped and asked themselves EVERY time they are about to vote or they are about to make a policy decision: Is my decision founded truly and honestly in what is best for the children in my charge?

What if our students’ educations really did come before the special interests of the unions?  What if academic excellence truly guided each teacher’s choices?  What if teachers had the freedom and ability to stretch their “teaching muscles” and reach for the sky with their classes?  What if school administrators had the ability to award excellent teachers who are actually performing beyond minimal standards with pay raises?  What if school board/committee members charged EVERY single bit of their energy into improving our schools for our children?  What if each and every community in our country was willing to abandon “business as usual” and challenge our teachers, administrators and school boards to address our deficiencies?

The next generation of students would certainly rise above the pitiful global standings American students are currently achieving.

Speaking of bullying . . .

http://www.wickedlocal.com/yarmouth/news/education/x1615410725/D-Y-School-Committee-seeks-Attorney-Generals-ruling-on-Henderson-e-mails

I came across the above article which was posted on November 18th on The Register’s website.  John Henderson’s comments which appear below the article shed some interesting light into more ugly business going on behind the scenes of the DY School Committee.  (I particularly enjoyed reading about Brad Egan’s accurate clarification of the public sentiment on the budget vote [School Committee business, nonetheless] and Steve Edwards’ nasty comment about John regarding Joe Cucinotta’s resignation [which absolutely proves, without any doubt, that Superintendent Woodbury withheld information from the Committee . . . just as I have stated here before].)

Interestingly, my first interactions with this School Committee occurred last spring after two teachers took it upon themselves to disrupt the graduating seniors’ Last Assembly and I was so infuriated at the mild, inequitable responses I received to my inquiries that I felt it necessary to express my concerns to the School Committee.  This, by the way, was the course of action I was told to take in order to be heard on the subject.  However, I was completely shut down and not allowed to speak.

There was one School Committee member who requested that the citizens be allowed to simply “be heard” without comment from the Committee.  He too was shut down.  I knew nothing of the individual School Committee members at that time.  Like most voting citizens, I did not involve myself too heavily on what went on at School Committee meetings.

That changed on the night of June 17th when I witnessed the willy-nilly adherence to Par Law being applied only when it suited the Chairman (and the Superintendent – who appears to, most of the time, call the shots through whispers in the Chairman’s ear).

Since that School Committee meeting and my extensive digging and delving into the business conducted at such meetings, I have continuously reported here on my blog the dysfunction, the deception, the ambiguities and the failings which I have encountered.

It seems that the voters spoke at the polls last year.  They spoke by voting in two new members to the School Committee: John Henderson and Andrea St. Germain.  I’m not familiar with Andrea’s campaign, but John’s campaign was founded on his desire to make changes for improvement to the district and to deviate from “business as usual” of the former School Committee(s).

It has been my observance at every Committee meeting that I have attended that John asks the questions to which the public (who voted him in, after all) wants answers and he gets lambasted for it each and every time.  He has described this most recent campaign against him as a good, old-fashioned “witch hunt.”

The definition of “witch hunt”: An investigation carried out ostensibly to uncover subversive activities but actually used to harass and undermine those with differing views.

Huh.  Sounds like bullying to me.  Shame on you School Committee.  That’s no example to set for our young students . . .

Based on the emails John published in his comments below the article posted on The Register, I can’t think of another way to describe it.  It appears very clear that every School Committee member has conducted Committee business in emails to the Committee, some far more egregiously than others.

From an outside perspective, I have concluded that the public voted in someone to make some much-needed changes to a flailing School Committee and district and when that new member didn’t fall in line like a good little soldier, the rest of the Committee is on the warpath to rake him over the coals.

Here’s the interesting thing to me.  Meanwhile, the business of the School Committee moves along painfully slowly, little gets accomplished, the voters’ intent is being completely and totally ignored and limited valuable financial resources are being wasted.  It’s exhausting.  How much money will be spent having legal counsel review alleged violations of the open meeting law against John, when he has just published fairly adequate proof that every other member has done the same?

Meanwhile, time is ticking and it won’t be long before we’ll all be back at the table arguing over next year’s budget and the voters will be ignored once again.

“Business as usual” is NOT working, folks.  The policies which need to be put in place and the goals which need to be set and the real business which may begin to turn things around in our district are continuously being averted, avoided and amended.