The school board has decided to hold a special meeting this Monday to get additional input from the community regarding the 4-day school week. The meeting will be held at 6 p.m. in the High School commons. There are no action items, and I don't know if there is even going to be an agenda.
There was a lot of talk from the School Board at the last meeting about getting everyone's feedback (on something the board has already voted to approve.) But when it was suggested by a community member that the Board take a show of hands to see how many of the roughly 60 people present were for or against the 4-day week, they wouldn't even call for that show of hands. What is that saying to the people who have been showing up at these meetings trying to be heard? Personally, I think that is demeaning to them and someone, ANYONE, on that Board should have at LEAST respected those present enough to call for that show of hands.
When one parent noted that he had emailed the individual Board members repeatedly and never gotten a response from any of them, there were just mealy mouthed excuses..and that was just from the few Board members who at least have the gumption to open their mouths at these meetings.
I'm starting to get the impression that the only "feedback" that is going to be considered is that which agrees with what the Board has already voted to do. Each Board member was given copies of the petitions that have been circulating to remove the Superintendent (100 signatures) and reject the 4-day week (86 signatures). Does that count as "feedback?"
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
AMEN!!!!!!!!! WE MUST HAVE A CHANGE! DEBRA - FRUSTRATED PARENT
ReplyDeleteMargo. Just to clear the record I have yet to receive the packets with the petitions you mention. I received an email from from John Manford on Monday - I was at the School Board Law Conference all weekend. I did email him back Monday and tell him I would attempt to call him. I got busy reviewing information that Amanda Woeger and Mike Nivison sent me and didn't make contact. That could be an excuse, but I do actually listen to what people have to say - whether I like what they say or not. I would still welcome the opportunity to review the material, however, I can tell you after talking to numerous people at the law conference and some additional friends there is no way to simply fire our superintendent - as the petitions request. I know that is not the answer people want, but right now that is the reality people must face. That doesn't mean I'm spineless or don't have the guts to speak up - that means I want to ensure we aren't paying two superintendents and an assistant.
ReplyDeleteOur "assistant superintendent," which is a misnomer because she actually was our director of curriculum and testing, has been moved to the special ed director. This was done last week.
People also need to take a hard look at HB 212 to better understand the place school board members are in with regard to what they are entitled to do.
Tonight (Wednesday, June 15) I posted on my Facebook page and my blog asking for feedback on the 4 day school week. I am asking for people's feedback because I want everyone to understand that by remaining with a 5 day school week we will be forced to RIF two or three additional teachers - which I think is also a bad situation. As I've said previously this is a bad sandwich and everyone has to take a bite ... we just have to figure out which bad taste EVERYONE wants in their mouths.
Do we have hard facts to support the savings we hope to gain? NO. (I don't think any school district can realistically give us those facts because not all districts face the severe winters we do. Last year we received a federal stimulus grant for $150K that covered our propane ... this year that grant isn't coming.)
Do we know if this will cause us to lose children? NO. (I will tell you there is rumor Alamo and numerous other schools in NM are looking at going to a 4 day week. I can also add that more than one Alamo parent has expressed interest in bringing their child up to Cloudcroft because of the potential 4 day week.)
And lastly ... Is your school board going to make a decision not everyone likes? YES. Answering any other way would be foolish. At this point, we must make decisions that will not be popular. In my opinion, we are ALL in a lose-lose situation and worst of all our children are going to be affected ... regardless of whether we have a 4 or 5 day week or we have a superintendent and asst. superintendent.
You mean that everyone must take a bite EXCEPT the administration! I dont see any sacrifices from admin. Not one.
ReplyDeleteI have a question. With 1.5 years left on Hancocks contract, why did the board see fit to give him another year in January? What kind of under the table deal was offered to you? Why on earth would you give anyone and additional year when there was already 1.5 years left. Afraid of losing him? That would be a blessing. It appears to me, after watching several of the board meetings, that the superintendent has the board members by the tail. You are simply doing what you're told. Am I wrong? Dont think so.
Mr.Ponder let me see if I have this straight...you claim if the 5 day school week remains in place, you will be forced to RIF 2-3 additional teachers (teachers...but NOT administration staff!)? Seems like everyone is taking a bite of that proverbial "bad sandwich" you talk about except the administration. In reguards to the "assistant superintendent" being moved...is her salary still the same? If it is, the move really has no meaning budget wise. Is she still going to be required to address curriculum too...or is Mr. Hancock going to add something to his plate? Is there "no simple way" to remove Mr. Hancock from his position because the school board voted to give him a 2 year contract (one of the "few" things you are "entitled" to do!) Are the contracts of the teachers with the "RIF bullseye on their foreheads" easier to break than his? Oh...and I am glad you find what the Alamogordo parents have to say so important...too bad you don't find what the Cloudcroft parents have to say as meaningful. Funny...since this is our community...not theirs! You are right about one thing...I do have a very "bad taste" left in my mouth!
ReplyDeleteI want to clarify a couple of things:
ReplyDeleteFirst, Arlan Ponder and Gerold Green were not on the school board when Mr. Hancock's contract was extended. Doug Porch, Bill Denney and Jackie Cates were part of the board when that decision was made. Certainly the question as to why the contract was extended is a great question and one that I'd like to hear the answer to.
Second: Arlan, about 1:18:45 into the podcast you said “I received your packet, I received your information, I have looked at it, I’ve got it right here in front of me." I took that to mean that you had received the packet and had looked at it.
Framing the debate as an either/or of firing teachers or having a 4-day week automatically eliminates other options (i.e. reducing administrators). It is time to think outside of the either/or box.
I would definitely like to hear why one position is sacred (Mr. Hancock's) yet everyone else is potentially on the chopping block. I don't expect the administration to put something like that on the agenda...but any board member should be able to add an agenda item!
So I'll take it like this:
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 1 - as Margo states I wasn't on the school board at that time so I don't know why they voted to approve his contract for another year. I was at that meeting and was just as shocked when it was on the agenda. Personally I think administrators should be just like teachers and have a one year contract ... or a two year contract with an "out clause" for both parties after one year. When you get into more years then you tend to start to have a fiefdom, which is part of what is wrong with our country not having term limits on Congressional leaders ... but that is off our current topic.
Anonymous 2 - I take tremendous offense to the comment "too bad you don't find what the Cloudcroft parents have to say as meaningful." I do take their opinions into account. If I didn't why would I make the motion for an additional meeting on the subject? When I voted for the 4 day school week initially I had not reviewed the state statute. I WAS WRONG and I hope to not make that mistake again. I've given people my email and my blog so they can communicate with me. I won't answer to personal attacks - and I've received those, but I will answer anyone who takes the time to ask a question or make an observation.
Margo: It was an hour and 18 minutes in ... it felt like three hours at that point. ;-)The packet I was referring to was one Amanda had emailed us. I even pointed to her when I said that. Mike Nivison pointed me toward some information and had also given me information that I was reviewing during the early portions of the meeting.
After meeting with John today for about two hours and going over some of the information in the packet he had I have found there were a few differences - this one had the petitions.
Unfortunately, I think we are at the "either/or" option. Parents need to know if they are going to have to schedule sitters/make arrangements/etc. for the 4-day week, while teachers being let go via the RIF are going to have to shop for a job. I hate being in this predicament, but the reality is what it is.
One thing I want to make clear from my side is IF we pass the 4-day week and come Spring 2012 we realize it didn't save us any money then I think we MUST look at going back to a 5-day schedule. Unfortunately I think unless opinions change about school funding in Santa Fe we will be looking at more cuts next year - again just my opinion.
Also some of those schools on the 4-day schedule that have been labeled by PED as "not met" have yet to turn in their actual numbers for the 2010-2011 year. What it appears to me is that is a fault in the system where a school is at "not met" until PED receives proof they are. Still working on that side of the issue though.
My father was a school teacher. A school teacher's salary put me through high school and college, so I appreciate a school teacher probably more than anyone knows. Am I protective of school teachers over administration ... you can probably answer that. I know we have some of the most dedicated teachers in the world up here and I applaud them and tell them thank you every opportunity I get. I also understand I don't want their jobs - it takes a special person to be around kids all day and I'm not that special - but I believe in protecting their jobs because I trust them enough to take care/and educate my children when I send them to school. Teachers often hear/see/learn of things from our kids long before we parents do ... just ask one of them.
As for your last question, I can't answer that right now because I don't know. Just being honest. I sent a request this a.m. to have an executive session put on the agenda for Monday night.
Arlan, thanks first and foremost for your transparency and willingness to say what you're thinking...and even write it down!
ReplyDeleteIf you do have an executive session, I hope you will have consulted the school's attorney as to what actions the board can take and how the executive session should be presented on the agenda. I also hope that the board sticks with the open meetings act and does not go into an executive session to reach a conclusion or consensus on something...as my understanding is that's illegal.
Arlen,
ReplyDeleteI too thank you for being so open. I do not know the address of your blog, but would like to have it, would you please email it to me?
I am sure that you already understand that board members are elected into office and thus are representatives of the whole community. Regardless of what your personal opinion may be, our concerns are legitimate and should be given the chance to make them known. This is the reason why the Administrative Code is written the way it is.
This is also a reason why the board must be able to document support - not through an anonymous survey, but through ballots and votes - I hope you will keep this in mind for the Monday meeting.
The board and superintendent have yet to demonstrate in numbers the actual savings they expect to gain - based on real data. Such numbers would be helpful in winning over community support. The savings have been quoted at $50,000 (see Mr. Hancock's "Fact Sheet" on the CMS website) - which does in fact amount to one teaching position. I agree with the $30,000 that could be saved in utilities/propane, however I disagree with the savings in substitute teaching costs. All you have to do is look last year's budget and the budget you just passed to understand what I mean. Last year (2010-11) $20,000 were allocated to substitutes and in the 2011-12 budget $15,000 are mentioned. That is only a $5,000 savings from the 178-day, 5-day week to the 155-day, 4-day week. This would be a total of $35,000 in savings going to the 4-day. My alternative proposal for a 155-day, 5-day week would still save around $32,000 in utilities (maybe more due to the long winter break when propane is high / and because school would be in session for about 3 weeks less than under the 4-day proposal). The 5-day proposal is a compromise (reduced number of school days, but a 5-day week) I hope that you and other board members will at least have a look at it for consideration.
(I know that teachers have written off a long winter break because it takes students time to get back into the swing of things, but this time could easily be made up by adding 1 more week in May - which could also cover the possibility of snow days).
Additionally, I will also argue that the same number of students who may want to come to Cloudcroft because of the 4-day week will leave Cloudcroft because of it. Rumors shouldn't carry the weight they currently do in this debate.
Again, I thank you again for your comments and thoughts on the matter. I assure you that I only want the best for my own kids, and for this reason I stand up. It is my deep feeling that the 4-day week cannot be a benefit to my or any child's education. This is of course an opinion, since there is little to no scientific research that shows how the condensed year affects student achievement.
Respectfully,
Amanda Woeger