Please allow me to prove a point in truth I've made before, this time through yet another independent source. Over the past six months, current "old board" members of the PUSD Governing Board have, meeting after meeting, chastised Diane Douglas for her stating that the opportunity for the public to address the board didn't exist before the new board was elected. These same board members make faces as Mrs. Douglas defends this assertion. They interrupt her. One even regularly raises her voice to her.
Thanks to dedicated blog readers who are willing to share the truth (the kind that can be backed up by independent sources such as the following), we have an article from November 13th, 2004, showing certain board members sounding a completely different tune than they have in the past six months. In fact, much of what they have said in the past six months regarding the public's former "ability" to address the board is contradicted in this article! It offers amazing evidence to validate the progress Mrs. Douglas has brought to our district.
Here's the newspaper article:
November 13, 2004
Section: VALLEY & State
Edition: Final Chaser
Page: B5
PEORIA PARENTS MAY GET LOUDER ON SCHOOL ISSUES
Louie Villalobos, The Arizona Republic
When Diane Douglas recently was elected to the Peoria Unified School District's governing board, she promised to give residents a louder voice in the decision-making process.
The first step, she said, should be to add a call to the public at all board meetings so residents can address the board on any topic.
"Even though it's not on the agenda, they can come to the meetings and ask the board to consider an issue at future meetings," Douglas said. "I think it would be a huge addition for our community."
Douglas, who will take her seat on the board in January, will have to rid the district of a long-standing practice of limiting public comments at meetings to only agenda items.
One board member said that policy serves as protection against verbal attacks, while a parents group said it is a muzzle on concerned community members.
Debra Raeder, who has been on the board since 1997, said that the district does an "admirable" job of giving the public an opportunity to address issues and that an open forum would pose a risk.
"Sometimes the issues are volatile, sometimes they're making accusations, and it's very hard for people to say, 'I can't respond,' " Raeder said, referring to a state law that prohibits board members from discussing non-agenda items during a call to the public, which allows residents to speak on any topic.
Raeder added that Peoria board members were under the impression they couldn't defend themselves against accusations during calls to the public. However, state law says board members can respond to "criticism."
Districts in Scottsdale, Tempe, Paradise Valley, Deer Valley, Phoenix, Litchfield Park, and Glendale have such calls to the public. Board members usually allow residents to voice any concerns they have without responding, often choosing to consider the matter at a future meeting.
Scott Seely, governing board president of the Litchfield Elementary School District, said those sessions can be helpful if residents offer up possible agenda items and keep the board informed on district problems.
Raeder said anybody can have something placed on the meeting agenda by contacting a board member or calling the district office.
Kim Olsen, vice president the Peoria United Parent Council, said having to track down board members can be difficult. She said she is asking the board for a call to the public at every meeting.
We believe that the community expects and has the right to be heard by those they elect to represent them," Olsen said.
*end article*
Not only were Mrs. Douglas and the other new board members able to successfully give the PUSD community a NEW voice in the PUSD, it is now overwhelmingly clear the ground they gained is NEW ground that the former board did not want to tread on. I can only hope people are now beginning to realize the honesty and determination of the new PUSD board members. May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
A Governing Board that Governs: A Novel Concept?
To many people in the Peoria Unified School District, apparently, it is. To other school districts across the nation with similar organizational structures, being without one would spell disaster. Case in point: as representatives of the PUSD community, governing board members have every right to be consulted on appointments of key administrative positions in the PUSD. Not only was it standard practice for the board to be consulted on such appointments in EXECUTIVE SESSION before Diane Douglas was elected (for truth, see 6-8-2004 agenda HERE), but simply because (and I feel funny even having to highlight this, but unfortunately, it is necessary to do so) any person in their right mind who is serving on the Governing Board of a school district with an ANNUAL Maintenance and Operations budget of over $200,000,000 (yes, TWO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS per year), who is accountable to the community of the PUSD, SHOULD want input on administrative appointments! Doesn’t this just make sense?
Of course it does. And to provide further proof that the board members should be consulted in a proper and effective manner that allows them to ensure the standards of the district and of the community are being upheld when administrative recommendations are made by top level district administration, let us explore what the governing board’s own policy says:
"3.4.3 Principals, Directors, and Other Administrative Positions
As administrative openings occur, the recruitment process will follow the District's affirmative action policy. Candidates will be solicited through university placement offices, educational publications and electronic bulletins, in-district posting, and general announcement. Notices will reflect general requirements for the position including academic preparation, experience and special skills as specified in the job description.
Various alternatives for selection of recommended candidates may be utilized as approved by the Superintendent. Review committees made up of patrons, Assistant Superintendents for K-12 Academic Services other administrators, staff members and students may be convened. External agencies or consultants may be included in the recruiting process.
The individuals recommended for positions shall be documented as having the skills, and the potential, to meet and exceed the responsibilities of the assignment. Documentation may be reflected in reports of rigorous, competitive interviews, tests, simulations and site visitations.
Upon completion of the interview process, the superintendent will provide the Governing Board with summary information, along with recommendations for appointment. The Governing Board will consider the final selection and appointment."
One of the functions of the governing board is to act as the community source of input into district operations. Since the governing board is now NOT consulted on administrative appointments like it always had been prior to 2005, then, as referenced in the above policy, were “alternatives for selection of recommended candidates” used to allow for community input through another channel? If they were not used, and the board was not to be consulted, THEN WHAT IS THE POINT OF HAVING ELECTED MEMBERS WHO REPRESENT THE COMMUNITY SERVE ON THE GOVERNING BOARD? Why not just replace them with appointees of the upper level district administration, as well!?
Interestingly, the last paragraph of that same policy informs us that “the Governing Board will consider the final selection and appointment” of recommendations. Did you know the word “CONSIDER” was actually “MAKE” before Diane Douglas was elected to the board?! Just ONE WORD was changed in the policy to try and strip the board of its right for consultation on administrative appointments in Executive Session. ONE WORD! What’s worse, changing that ONE WORD from “make” to “consider”, essentially allowed for the creation of a rubber stamp of the administration’s recommendations. Why even bother calling them “recommendations”, then!? If they are concrete appointments from the start and there is to be no consultation with community representatives (ie Governing Board), then why even bother bringing them up in a public meeting, at all!?
The newer board members are attempting to perform the correct function a board is supposed to perform: to GOVERN. The school board is the Governing Body overseeing the district, which top level district administration is supposed to work for; it sets policy and helps to ensure compliance with the policy it sets so as to establish a proper and effective system of checks and balances in the public school district setting. What many in the PUSD are not used to is a Governing Board acting like a Governing Board. The governing board has served as a "governed board" for years prior to the current new board, in which it was, what many people say, controlled by those it is supposed to oversee.
That a group of people (new board) would actually want to uphold and carry out the duties they were elected to carry out has seemingly been a huge eye opener to a district that has previously been encumbered by a virtual absence of an elected oversight body. It will quickly end up being understood as one of the most positive changes to have ever occured in our district, and will result in fair hiring practices, transparency, and true community connectedness unlike any ever seen before. For the sake of the employees of the PUSD, I am even hopeful it will result in the creation of a truly independent Human Resources Department that answers directly to the board rather than the top level district administrators, so employees no longer have to fear retribution and can be at peace in their careers knowing full well they have someone independent and confidential to go to for help when a situation arises that needs to be addressed. Thank you Mrs. Douglas, Mrs. Knecht, and Mr. Murphy. You have stayed true to every campaign promise, you are attempting to serve in your capacities to the best of your abilities, and you are making the community proud by representing it as you should. I can't wait to see what the future holds for our great district, which now has a true GOVERNING board! May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
Of course it does. And to provide further proof that the board members should be consulted in a proper and effective manner that allows them to ensure the standards of the district and of the community are being upheld when administrative recommendations are made by top level district administration, let us explore what the governing board’s own policy says:
"3.4.3 Principals, Directors, and Other Administrative Positions
As administrative openings occur, the recruitment process will follow the District's affirmative action policy. Candidates will be solicited through university placement offices, educational publications and electronic bulletins, in-district posting, and general announcement. Notices will reflect general requirements for the position including academic preparation, experience and special skills as specified in the job description.
Various alternatives for selection of recommended candidates may be utilized as approved by the Superintendent. Review committees made up of patrons, Assistant Superintendents for K-12 Academic Services other administrators, staff members and students may be convened. External agencies or consultants may be included in the recruiting process.
The individuals recommended for positions shall be documented as having the skills, and the potential, to meet and exceed the responsibilities of the assignment. Documentation may be reflected in reports of rigorous, competitive interviews, tests, simulations and site visitations.
Upon completion of the interview process, the superintendent will provide the Governing Board with summary information, along with recommendations for appointment. The Governing Board will consider the final selection and appointment."
One of the functions of the governing board is to act as the community source of input into district operations. Since the governing board is now NOT consulted on administrative appointments like it always had been prior to 2005, then, as referenced in the above policy, were “alternatives for selection of recommended candidates” used to allow for community input through another channel? If they were not used, and the board was not to be consulted, THEN WHAT IS THE POINT OF HAVING ELECTED MEMBERS WHO REPRESENT THE COMMUNITY SERVE ON THE GOVERNING BOARD? Why not just replace them with appointees of the upper level district administration, as well!?
Interestingly, the last paragraph of that same policy informs us that “the Governing Board will consider the final selection and appointment” of recommendations. Did you know the word “CONSIDER” was actually “MAKE” before Diane Douglas was elected to the board?! Just ONE WORD was changed in the policy to try and strip the board of its right for consultation on administrative appointments in Executive Session. ONE WORD! What’s worse, changing that ONE WORD from “make” to “consider”, essentially allowed for the creation of a rubber stamp of the administration’s recommendations. Why even bother calling them “recommendations”, then!? If they are concrete appointments from the start and there is to be no consultation with community representatives (ie Governing Board), then why even bother bringing them up in a public meeting, at all!?
The newer board members are attempting to perform the correct function a board is supposed to perform: to GOVERN. The school board is the Governing Body overseeing the district, which top level district administration is supposed to work for; it sets policy and helps to ensure compliance with the policy it sets so as to establish a proper and effective system of checks and balances in the public school district setting. What many in the PUSD are not used to is a Governing Board acting like a Governing Board. The governing board has served as a "governed board" for years prior to the current new board, in which it was, what many people say, controlled by those it is supposed to oversee.
That a group of people (new board) would actually want to uphold and carry out the duties they were elected to carry out has seemingly been a huge eye opener to a district that has previously been encumbered by a virtual absence of an elected oversight body. It will quickly end up being understood as one of the most positive changes to have ever occured in our district, and will result in fair hiring practices, transparency, and true community connectedness unlike any ever seen before. For the sake of the employees of the PUSD, I am even hopeful it will result in the creation of a truly independent Human Resources Department that answers directly to the board rather than the top level district administrators, so employees no longer have to fear retribution and can be at peace in their careers knowing full well they have someone independent and confidential to go to for help when a situation arises that needs to be addressed. Thank you Mrs. Douglas, Mrs. Knecht, and Mr. Murphy. You have stayed true to every campaign promise, you are attempting to serve in your capacities to the best of your abilities, and you are making the community proud by representing it as you should. I can't wait to see what the future holds for our great district, which now has a true GOVERNING board! May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
Sunday, June 17, 2007
Let the Numbers Speak for Themselves
A vocal minority now regularly attends PUSD board meetings to harass the PUSD governing board for protecting its students during lunch hours by closing campuses. This same vocal minority chastises the board for "not listenting to the community" and "ignoring the will of parents". An online poll found here (bottom of page) shows what the majority of the community really believes. After voting, if you return to the bottom of the page, you will see the results.
As one may now have assumed after so many deceptions have been debunked, the poll simply ends up serving to reinforce the validity of the decision of Kathy Knecht, Rick Murphy, and Diane Douglas to protect PUSD's high school students by closing campuses during lunch. Once again, we see independent proof that the new board listens to the community rather than an elite few. Thank you, PUSD governing board members Kathy Knecht, Rick Murphy, and Diane Douglas, for putting PUSD students and the PUSD community first. May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
As of 10:56 pm, Sunday, June 17th poll numbers looked like this:
Do you agree with Peoria Unified School District's recent decision to close high school campuses during lunch?
Yes, it keeps students safe 62.50%
No, it should be up to parents to decide 37.50%
Total Votes: 1904
**Please keep in mind these numbers are dynamic and will change as people continue to vote (more reason to cast yours!). These numbers are simply reflective of the moment I voted, after 1904 votes had been cast. Thanks!
As one may now have assumed after so many deceptions have been debunked, the poll simply ends up serving to reinforce the validity of the decision of Kathy Knecht, Rick Murphy, and Diane Douglas to protect PUSD's high school students by closing campuses during lunch. Once again, we see independent proof that the new board listens to the community rather than an elite few. Thank you, PUSD governing board members Kathy Knecht, Rick Murphy, and Diane Douglas, for putting PUSD students and the PUSD community first. May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
As of 10:56 pm, Sunday, June 17th poll numbers looked like this:
Do you agree with Peoria Unified School District's recent decision to close high school campuses during lunch?
Yes, it keeps students safe 62.50%
No, it should be up to parents to decide 37.50%
Total Votes: 1904
**Please keep in mind these numbers are dynamic and will change as people continue to vote (more reason to cast yours!). These numbers are simply reflective of the moment I voted, after 1904 votes had been cast. Thanks!
Congratulations to PUSD Seniors AND Teachers!
Meghan E. Moravcik posted a great article highlighting the achievements of PUSD seniors. A big thank you to all PUSD teachers, and a huge congratulations to the PUSD seniors for performing so well. Check it out when you have a moment:
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0613gl-peoaims0613-ON.html
May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0613gl-peoaims0613-ON.html
May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
Integrity and How to Keep a Promise: Rick Murphy
I firmly believe all of my readers will appreciate Mr. Murphy's excellent article. Rare is it that we get to hear his take on things without being rudely interrupted.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/westvalleyopinions/articles/0614gl-murphy0615.html
Mr. Murphy, you and two of your fellow board members are making PUSD history. You are attempting to perform your governing board duties and govern, rather than be governed and have them performed for you. Your integrity shines! May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/westvalleyopinions/articles/0614gl-murphy0615.html
Mr. Murphy, you and two of your fellow board members are making PUSD history. You are attempting to perform your governing board duties and govern, rather than be governed and have them performed for you. Your integrity shines! May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
Friday, June 15, 2007
Office of the Auditor General and the PUSD: Back up top by popular demand
Note: Many readers have asked me to focus on the interesting questions brought forward in this blog article. New info was coming at such a fast rate, the new posts were distracting attention from older ones (probably overwhelming many people at the same time). I will try to keep it up top for some time to encourage people to give it a glance.
While recently researching classroom dollars spent by some of the largest districts in our state on the State of Arizona Auditor General's website, I ran into some perplexing information regarding teacher salaries in the PUSD. So perplexing, as a matter of fact, that I believe further investigation into the information is warranted by independent certified public accountants. I will try to make the following as painless as possible to read, but bear with me, as we all know numbers can get confusing.As seen on
http://www.auditorgen.state.az.us/Reports/School_Districts/Districts/Peoria%20USD/Peoria%20USD.htm,
under "fiscal year 2006" we see that in:
2004, the average teacher salary in the PUSD was $41,245
2005, the average teacher salary was $43,495
2006, the average teacher salary was $50,182
Does anyone else see a problem here? There is an increase of $6,687, YES, SIX THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY SEVEN DOLLARS, reported in the average teacher salary between years 2005 and 2006! Moving at a maximum allowed two horizontal rows to the right (professional growth), and one vertical row down (years of experience, which don't actually indicate years of experience in the PUSD due to base row removals and numerous "freezes"; maybe I'll exlore this more at a later date), the MOST MONEY a teacher can add to his/her salary from one year to the next on top of measly one to two percent base salary "raises" is $3350, again, the MAXIMUM AMOUNT A TEACHER COULD INCREASE HIS/HER SALARY ON TOP OF SMALL BASE RAISES WAS THREE THOUSAND, THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS during the same period, not deducting the money spent on tuition to move horizontally for professional growth (which is why the 2004-2005 increase of $2250 seems somewhat more plausible despite continued exodus from buyout option). This reported monumental jump in average teacher salary also comes at the tail end of a mass exodus of highly experienced and higher paid teachers due to a controversial teacher buyout plan that bled our district of its most qualified and highly experienced teachers, replacing them with new, bottom of the salary schedule teachers, which should lead us to naturally assume that salary averages would be driven downward. This was, mysteriously, not the case in PUSD.
How in the world did the increase in average salaries NEARLY TRIPLE from the previous fiscal year?!Even if ALL teachers in the district remained fully employed from the 2005 school year through the 2006 school year, with none of our highest paid teachers leaving due to a "buyout", with ALL of those teachers moving over two horizontal rows of professional growth (which has NEVER happened in the PUSD; moving horizontally just one row is not even acheived by ALL teachers) the heavenly increase of $6,687 dollars in average teacher pay is still ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE under almost any scenario, including hypothetical scenarios that would say all lower level, lower paid teachers exited the district (which of course isn't the case, either).Who provided the Auditor General's office with these numbers? If incorrect,these umbers are a horrible slap in the face to all teachers of the Peoria Unified School District and all taxpayers who support them. Someone must put an end to these deceptions. I challenge ANYONE who knows ANY teacher in the Peoria Unified School District to find a teacher who received such a huge salary increase, and ask that they contact me immediately to assuage my fears of this outrageous deception's implications. This appears to be one of the biggest travesties of the truth yet. Some people say the PUSD has already lost its credibility, and this certainly may be the turning point for those who have disagreed with that assertion in the past. What in the world is going on here? This must be explored further. I can only hope the Arizona Republic and the Auditor General's Office itself who have reported on teacher salaries in the past are made aware of these GLARING INCONSISTENCIES. May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
While recently researching classroom dollars spent by some of the largest districts in our state on the State of Arizona Auditor General's website, I ran into some perplexing information regarding teacher salaries in the PUSD. So perplexing, as a matter of fact, that I believe further investigation into the information is warranted by independent certified public accountants. I will try to make the following as painless as possible to read, but bear with me, as we all know numbers can get confusing.As seen on
http://www.auditorgen.state.az.us/Reports/School_Districts/Districts/Peoria%20USD/Peoria%20USD.htm,
under "fiscal year 2006" we see that in:
2004, the average teacher salary in the PUSD was $41,245
2005, the average teacher salary was $43,495
2006, the average teacher salary was $50,182
Does anyone else see a problem here? There is an increase of $6,687, YES, SIX THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED EIGHTY SEVEN DOLLARS, reported in the average teacher salary between years 2005 and 2006! Moving at a maximum allowed two horizontal rows to the right (professional growth), and one vertical row down (years of experience, which don't actually indicate years of experience in the PUSD due to base row removals and numerous "freezes"; maybe I'll exlore this more at a later date), the MOST MONEY a teacher can add to his/her salary from one year to the next on top of measly one to two percent base salary "raises" is $3350, again, the MAXIMUM AMOUNT A TEACHER COULD INCREASE HIS/HER SALARY ON TOP OF SMALL BASE RAISES WAS THREE THOUSAND, THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS during the same period, not deducting the money spent on tuition to move horizontally for professional growth (which is why the 2004-2005 increase of $2250 seems somewhat more plausible despite continued exodus from buyout option). This reported monumental jump in average teacher salary also comes at the tail end of a mass exodus of highly experienced and higher paid teachers due to a controversial teacher buyout plan that bled our district of its most qualified and highly experienced teachers, replacing them with new, bottom of the salary schedule teachers, which should lead us to naturally assume that salary averages would be driven downward. This was, mysteriously, not the case in PUSD.
How in the world did the increase in average salaries NEARLY TRIPLE from the previous fiscal year?!Even if ALL teachers in the district remained fully employed from the 2005 school year through the 2006 school year, with none of our highest paid teachers leaving due to a "buyout", with ALL of those teachers moving over two horizontal rows of professional growth (which has NEVER happened in the PUSD; moving horizontally just one row is not even acheived by ALL teachers) the heavenly increase of $6,687 dollars in average teacher pay is still ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE under almost any scenario, including hypothetical scenarios that would say all lower level, lower paid teachers exited the district (which of course isn't the case, either).Who provided the Auditor General's office with these numbers? If incorrect,these umbers are a horrible slap in the face to all teachers of the Peoria Unified School District and all taxpayers who support them. Someone must put an end to these deceptions. I challenge ANYONE who knows ANY teacher in the Peoria Unified School District to find a teacher who received such a huge salary increase, and ask that they contact me immediately to assuage my fears of this outrageous deception's implications. This appears to be one of the biggest travesties of the truth yet. Some people say the PUSD has already lost its credibility, and this certainly may be the turning point for those who have disagreed with that assertion in the past. What in the world is going on here? This must be explored further. I can only hope the Arizona Republic and the Auditor General's Office itself who have reported on teacher salaries in the past are made aware of these GLARING INCONSISTENCIES. May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Murphy Wins; the "Other" board member...well...read on
The same board member that criticized Mr. Murphy for narrowly winning his House seat actually ran for a State House Seat herself...AND LOST! Lets look at the election results from her run for a AZ State House of Reps seat in 2000, taken from the Arizona Secretary of State's Website:
Her total votes: 4214
The winner's total: 8491
Not only did she lose, she lost by a 2 to 1 margin!
Being the professional that he is, Mr. Murphy calmly turned the other cheek and did not entertain her derangement of the board, taking the high road as he always has. We can only guess what was running through his head, though.
Let's give it a try! Here I go:
"She had the nerve to make fun of ME for WINNING my seats!? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I can understand jealousy, but, come on, why would anyone of their own volition want to make themselves look so foolish and embarrassed in the public eye by attacking ME for winning the same thing that they so BADLY LOST!? Have the voters and teachers figured out what kind of people the new board members are dealing with? It didn't take me long! By the way...my hearing is getting worse from my close proximity to all of this SHRILL SQUAWKING. Hasn't she figured out she doesn't rule the world yet, that the Challenger Center's financial field day has been put to a permanent end, that the governing board now wants to do its job instead of having district admin do it for us, and that the ruder she is to the world, the less they are going to like her?"
Just my take on what might have been going on in his head at that time!
Perception may be reality to the "old" board members, but knowledge certainly is power to those of us who put our minds to work and do the thinking and research for ourselves! May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
Her total votes: 4214
The winner's total: 8491
Not only did she lose, she lost by a 2 to 1 margin!
Being the professional that he is, Mr. Murphy calmly turned the other cheek and did not entertain her derangement of the board, taking the high road as he always has. We can only guess what was running through his head, though.
Let's give it a try! Here I go:
"She had the nerve to make fun of ME for WINNING my seats!? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I can understand jealousy, but, come on, why would anyone of their own volition want to make themselves look so foolish and embarrassed in the public eye by attacking ME for winning the same thing that they so BADLY LOST!? Have the voters and teachers figured out what kind of people the new board members are dealing with? It didn't take me long! By the way...my hearing is getting worse from my close proximity to all of this SHRILL SQUAWKING. Hasn't she figured out she doesn't rule the world yet, that the Challenger Center's financial field day has been put to a permanent end, that the governing board now wants to do its job instead of having district admin do it for us, and that the ruder she is to the world, the less they are going to like her?"
Just my take on what might have been going on in his head at that time!
Perception may be reality to the "old" board members, but knowledge certainly is power to those of us who put our minds to work and do the thinking and research for ourselves! May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
To My Readers:
As I don't advertise my blog, I have a quick request. While it continues to grow feverishly in popularity, we can further the rapid expansion of readers if you kindly continue sharing my website with your friends, teachers, and fellow taxpayers of the PUSD. A brief welcome and thanks to the dozen or so administrators who have recently emailed their support. Together, we can all make a difference. May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
(: Dominic
Monday, June 11, 2007
Comment Moderation, EyeOnPUSDTruth, and the "Other" Blogs: Let the Truth Be Told
For some people, the proverbial waste product has definitely hit the fan. I mean, to shoot yourself in the foot once is painful, but after countless times, a person doesn't have much left to stand on! As a result of the many truths I have told on my humble blog, I have received a few angry emails from people who are very upset that I am making a legitimate attempt at providing a positive avenue of deception-debunking for teachers and taxpayers of the Peoria Unified School District, asking me why I am "afraid to allow them to leave comments". I have also received a ton of emails from people thanking me for my postings, and asking if they can be members of my blog to leave comments. My blog, however, is just that: MY SITE. A person can quickly take an objective look at all of my postings and see that I don't edit comments or allow comments from one side or the other on any issue, for that matter. I prevent ANYONE from doing so. If I did allow comments, as the numbers in my email inbox indicate, there would be a minimum 20 praising my postings to 1 upset with them. To be fair, however, NONE have been posted. A person doesn't have to jump through any hoops on my blog site to comment. A person simply isn't allowed ( ;
My blog provides an opportunity for ME to positively support the newest board members and the change they are trying to bring to the great Peoria Unified School District. It will not be used to call names (I have already been accused of labeling other bloggers, but I plead with anyone to find that in my blog), argue, or single anyone out by name. I believe this to be extremely counterproductive. For all of you who hate my freedom of speech, please read the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, and remember we live in the United States of America. Create your own blogs. As for mine, it will be used to factually present what is occurring in PUSD to the best of my ability, and to relay what the refreshingly great new board members (Mrs. Douglas included) of the Peoria Unified School District are doing to end a nightmarish five years of inept district leadership.
There are "other" blogs out there allowing their proprietors to exercise their freedom of speech as well. I commend them for creating blogs to support their beliefs. Although they may be upset with me for conveying the truth about happenings in the PUSD, I must point out:
while they claim to allow a person to "comment away", please allow me to provide for you the warning that ALL of their "comments" sections display, when a person attempts to leave a comment:
"Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author."
Hmm. I can only imagine how many comments have failed "approval"! I'm sure you find this as interesting as I do. This exemplifies the type of false-front that has existed in the great PUSD for so many years now. Is censorship tantamount to freedom of speech? I think not! Rather, I know it is not. It is precisely what allows a person to control the appearance of something, while hiding the truth of the matter. I must ask: What are these people afraid of? The truth?!
A HUGE thank you to the hundreds of people who have written me to thank me for providing an alternative to the hatefulness and deception fostered in "other" writings. To the ever-growing number of teachers who are thanking me for advocating on their behalf (the number afraid to speak out to the district office due to fear of retribution is astounding), I can only say this: Thank you for caring about our children; nothing I can do for you can top what you do to advance society. My readers' support, and our common desire to find truth and transparency as taxpaying parents in the PUSD, is what keeps me going. My email address is clearly posted on my main blog page, and anyone for or against what I have to say can feel free to share with me at any time. May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
My blog provides an opportunity for ME to positively support the newest board members and the change they are trying to bring to the great Peoria Unified School District. It will not be used to call names (I have already been accused of labeling other bloggers, but I plead with anyone to find that in my blog), argue, or single anyone out by name. I believe this to be extremely counterproductive. For all of you who hate my freedom of speech, please read the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, and remember we live in the United States of America. Create your own blogs. As for mine, it will be used to factually present what is occurring in PUSD to the best of my ability, and to relay what the refreshingly great new board members (Mrs. Douglas included) of the Peoria Unified School District are doing to end a nightmarish five years of inept district leadership.
There are "other" blogs out there allowing their proprietors to exercise their freedom of speech as well. I commend them for creating blogs to support their beliefs. Although they may be upset with me for conveying the truth about happenings in the PUSD, I must point out:
while they claim to allow a person to "comment away", please allow me to provide for you the warning that ALL of their "comments" sections display, when a person attempts to leave a comment:
"Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author."
Hmm. I can only imagine how many comments have failed "approval"! I'm sure you find this as interesting as I do. This exemplifies the type of false-front that has existed in the great PUSD for so many years now. Is censorship tantamount to freedom of speech? I think not! Rather, I know it is not. It is precisely what allows a person to control the appearance of something, while hiding the truth of the matter. I must ask: What are these people afraid of? The truth?!
A HUGE thank you to the hundreds of people who have written me to thank me for providing an alternative to the hatefulness and deception fostered in "other" writings. To the ever-growing number of teachers who are thanking me for advocating on their behalf (the number afraid to speak out to the district office due to fear of retribution is astounding), I can only say this: Thank you for caring about our children; nothing I can do for you can top what you do to advance society. My readers' support, and our common desire to find truth and transparency as taxpaying parents in the PUSD, is what keeps me going. My email address is clearly posted on my main blog page, and anyone for or against what I have to say can feel free to share with me at any time. May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
Friday, June 1, 2007
Douglas Does it Right, Once Again
Playing by the rules is supposed to keep a person out of trouble. When you play by the rules in a politically charged board meeting, however, where some board members are fuming from a loss of destructive power, you are bound to be attacked even more. Time and time again, we observe an interesting phenomenon at the PUSD board meetings. No matter what Mrs. Douglas says or does, two other board members always go out of their way to show their hatred towards her. Never was there a more clear cut example than at the 5/22/07 board meeting, when Mrs. Douglas requested staff to provide information about the plans to provide lunches to students at high school campuses after NUMEROUS students addressed the board stating the food services dept would be unable to provide lunches for the increased amount of students on campus as a result of the closed campus policy starting next school year. One board member, who apparently could not make sense of another board member wanting an update on the way things are being arranged to accomodate a new district policy (imagine that), threatened to file a complaint against Mrs. Douglas, with the AZ attorney general's office for what she claimed was a violation of open meeting law. The other board member claimed Mrs. Douglas violated open meeting law by asking administration to review this assertion on the part of the speakers. Mrs. Douglas backed away from the never ending chaos that is thrown in front of the board by people with more years on the board but seemingly much less competence regarding board policy. How she is able to deal with the nightmare so calmly and professionally, I will never be able to understand. If only all of us were blessed with her patience! Let's analyze this, and allow you to form your own conclusion as to whether or not Mrs. Douglas played by the rules:
From the board meeting agenda that same night:
Public Comment: Pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.01(G) this agenda item provides an Open Call to the Public allowing individuals to address the Governing Board on any issue within the jurisdiction of the Board. Individual comment will be limited to three minutes. Statute prohibits the Governing Board from discussing an item that is not on the agenda but individual members of the Governing Board may respond to criticism, ask staff to review a matter or ask that a matter be put on a future Board agenda.
Call me crazy, but when I read this item, I clearly see that it is within the board's own policy for a board member to ask for a review. Mrs. Douglas, as always, shows that she governs with integrity, and plays by the rules. How dare other people attack someone for attempting to do her job. Are you sick and tired of the unnecessary road blocks being thrown at the governing board members? I certaily am. A violation of open meeting law!? Give me a break. I used to think this type of childish, embarassing desperation existed only in a junior high setting, and never would have imagined I would find it in a publicly broadcast board meeting comprised of professional educators.
When will the deception end? When will the governing board members be allowed to advance the district's mission without bitter resentment due to a loss of destructive power? Speak up, community. Certain members of the PUSD governing board are a shameful disgrace and an embarassment to the teaching profession. The taxpayers, our teachers, and our students deserve better. May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
From the board meeting agenda that same night:
Public Comment: Pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.01(G) this agenda item provides an Open Call to the Public allowing individuals to address the Governing Board on any issue within the jurisdiction of the Board. Individual comment will be limited to three minutes. Statute prohibits the Governing Board from discussing an item that is not on the agenda but individual members of the Governing Board may respond to criticism, ask staff to review a matter or ask that a matter be put on a future Board agenda.
Call me crazy, but when I read this item, I clearly see that it is within the board's own policy for a board member to ask for a review. Mrs. Douglas, as always, shows that she governs with integrity, and plays by the rules. How dare other people attack someone for attempting to do her job. Are you sick and tired of the unnecessary road blocks being thrown at the governing board members? I certaily am. A violation of open meeting law!? Give me a break. I used to think this type of childish, embarassing desperation existed only in a junior high setting, and never would have imagined I would find it in a publicly broadcast board meeting comprised of professional educators.
When will the deception end? When will the governing board members be allowed to advance the district's mission without bitter resentment due to a loss of destructive power? Speak up, community. Certain members of the PUSD governing board are a shameful disgrace and an embarassment to the teaching profession. The taxpayers, our teachers, and our students deserve better. May the truth prevail!
(: Dominic
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)