You know that awful feeling you get when you see an angry parent in the grocery check-out line punishing a child far too severely? Your worry is "If that's what he'll do in public, what might he do in private?" This latest blast to the Durango Herald from 9-R makes one wonder what the standards now are for acceptable behaviors at 9-R. "Toxic" is a term we've heard used more than once in connection with 9-R working conditions.
Is the following what 9-R would call "a biased interpretation" of a Durango Herald story?
Durango Herald 8/20/2005 "Some district staff members perceive an atmosphere of fear and intimidation," consultant Robert Tschirki told board members and Superintendent Mary Barter.
Risking further rebukes from 12th Street, we ask once again - What follow up strategies were put in place in response to the Tschirki Report?
We're sticking with our motto: Citizens for transparent and open government.
We believe citizens not only have a right to create the space to hear each other, it is their responsibility. Sorry, 9-R, we will not be bullied.
38 comments:
Well, one of the problems is apparently we are not a member of COSPRA, (Colorado School Public Relations Association), which is an association of NSPRA. (National School Public Relations Association).
Perhaps if we were a member, and followed the code of ethics, then our PIO wouldn't treat people so appallingly.
The code of ethics are posted in the Public Misinformation Office blog.
When you see how many of the code of ethics our PIO fails, then you begin to understand how it might be under a different leadership.
There are so many great administrators and staff in our school district, that I know two things: (1) We could lead this district without the Superintendent and PIO, because we have good people who can step in and take over (2) We could get what the community climate desires. Open Governance. Trust and honesty.
We could rebuild parent, teacher, administration relationships to the level that we all deserve, so that our kids, the #1 product of the education system, get the absolute best.
After all -- that's why we either work in education or send our kid's to school. We want to trust each other, and we want to work together. All of us.
Under the current leadership, we are currently all suffering.
For the record, I have not made any decisions about 9-R based on a few articles in the Durango Herald. I formed my own opinions from personal experience. I have made comments based on those experiences. I am not a bully. I am just so tired of "business as usual" in 9-R.
We have so many talented and concerned parents and community members who have been driven away from 9-R because of the administration's attitude and treatment toward them.
What do we want? A voice. We want to be part of the equation. We are not illiterate or uneducated. We are the strength of this district. We are passionate because these are our children we have entrusted to a district that's failing to educate them and failing to take responsibility for it.
Ms. Uroda, you are way off base. You have no right to disrespect the parents who voice their opinions of, and objections to, the way the administration misleads this district. We are not talking about a "few disgruntled bloggers." Most parents I know feel this way. Most parents I know are tired of this mess. Most parents I know want a change. Most parents I know don't even blog here. This is the general feeling in this district.
I have personally witnessed deceptive and misleading information being presented by the adminitration. I did not read about it in the paper, I watched it. And when I saw it with my own eyes, I knew it was time to do something.
This blog is active again because we're fed up and we want a change. We want our district to excel and shine. We want all of our children, gifted or challenged, to receive a full education. When you stop listening to parents and concerned community members and drive them out of the schools, you lose a valuable resource.
Those who say they care so much about this district should show us . . . . resign and give us a new start.
There were 391 page requests the day Uroda's letter came out!
Is that a "few disgruntled bloggers"? Or a community wanting to read and discuss either on here, or "out there" in their homes, offices and cafes?
Change is good.
What the superintendent and public information officer "did" for dyslexic students is appalling. I suppose we are referred to in Deborah's letter as "a few disgruntled bloggers" who have "special interests".
Well heck yes, Deb! Dyslexia is of "special interest" to me, but as you know it went beyond me. Once you didn't remediate my son during a 4 year opportunity, I hired a private certified tutor who got him 6 grade levels ahead, so that he entered DHS with an 11th grade reading age, instead of the 4.6 grade reading level 9-R had him at for four years.
More than that, I spent FIVE years writing to ex-Congressman Mark Larson, not just being "disgruntled", but researching dyslexia, and other State Law's so that we could change our state law. Now the new ECEA says the D word: Dyslexia is a Specific Learning Disability in the State of Colorado, not some pseudo mysterious thing called Perceptual Communicative Disability that made everyone in 9-R deny that dyslexia was the cause, and therefore research how we could serve those children. We couldn't even say "dyslexic" in a IEP meeting without someone saying: "Oh we don't recognize dyslexia in the State of Colorado" Gag me. They were dyslexic. They can be taught. But let's pretend we don't recognize it.
According to the National Institute of Health, Dyslexia affects between 15-20% of the school population. Or approximately 800 of Durango School District 9-R's students. The fact we only diagnose 5% is neither here nor there. (It's part of the numbers game, i.e. identify the least, because we can't have more than X).
800 of OUR students are worth fighting for Deb. That's 800 students we COULD teach to read, or we could choose to ignore like you did.
Let Sheriff Duke 'av 'em in the pen, if you want to right us off as "special interest" "disgruntled" bloggers.
I'm special interest and loving it.
If I can make a difference in the lives of up to 800 of our students then I'm gung ho. Surveys have shown that over 80% of youth in prison are illiterate. That spurs me on as a parent, because I don't want my child to go to prison, simply because you didn't teach him to read; instead you wrote a phony 4 page document trying to prove to me and other special interested parties that 9-R were providing a "scientifically proven method of teaching". If this were true, show me any dyslexic student reading to grade level? You can't.
They can show me in Washington. Texas. Florida. Pueblo 60 in Colorado. And no doubt lots of other school districts are providing this method of teaching in small groups in public schools across the country. (Please don't even try to say: "Oh...it's one on one teaching", because it happens in special ed. classes with 8 children all over the country).
Check their CSAPs. Check their ACTs. Check their SATs. Check their reading age in 12th grade, because I for one WEEP when I here about yet another 12th grade dyslexic student with a 4th or 5th grade reading age.
If you are a teacher reading this, I am categorically NOT having a go at you or your colleagues. It is the teachers who have told me, that they could remediate our dyslexic students if they were allowed to pick their classes, and work with them appropriately.
This is truly the fault of Dr. Barter. There. I said it. Dr. Barter ignored me, my ideas, my pleas, for six whole years. State Law changed things, and the Director of Student Achievement and Director of San Juan BOCES changed things. Thank you for the change! Truly. Thank you to the teachers who are being certified as we speak. Bravo.
In my opinion, you have lied to me since the year 2000. "Special Interest" -- yup, that's me. And, I'm proud to have a special interest in so many wonderful children in our school district and in the State of Colorado.
I can't remember the exact correlation, but there is a formula for figuring out how many people are "disgruntled" based on those who actually write or call about it. Politicians use this as a way to gauge public interest in certain issues. A phone call from one person represents so many people and a letter represents so many people as well. The point? Ms. Uroda, based on this blog and the 391 page requests, I believe there are more than just a "few disgruntled" people out there because they represent many more interested parties.
This is not about a few people here and there who are unhappy. It is about a large percentage of this district being dissatisfied with it. If we were in the private sector, I'd guess some of you in the administration would already be out of a job. Where else can "customers" be so highly dissatisifed and still have to deal with it? If you were producing a product in such a poor way, you'd be out of business.
Can't the administrators see how bad this is? If you really care about these kids, do the right thing. Resign.
Oh please, Ms. Uroda!
Mary Barter, with whatever good intentions her tenure may have begun, does not now "make decisions in the best interests of all children." Instead, through her actions and her specious opinion pieces (oops, I meant to say "columns") in the Herald, she ignores the well documented needs of entire groups of children and then tries to cover her actions through lies or half-truths. I sat at the last board meeting and watched speechless (literally speechless, we weren't allowed to talk!) as Ms. Barter flat-out tried to bury embarrassing results from a recent teacher/student survey. So don't you dare say that the 9R administration is in the business of disseminating "factual information about our school district." As "director of public information," you are by your position complicit in this coverup by your action or inaction.
And far from ignoring the needs of only "a few disgruntled bloggers" the needs of dyslexic children, gifted children, in fact any child who does not fit into the narrow "box" defined by 9R education are ignored and their protests swept under the rug. Apparently the entire freshman class at DHS starts off by being booed by the rest of the school. I'd say that's more than "a few" children who are being made to feel that they shouldn't even show up at school, let alone led to believe that their individual needs will be addressed.
As for anonymity, there are many people who do not feel they can challenge the 9R "empire" openly without risking retribution of some sort. Teachers and substitute teachers, as well as many parents and students fall into this category. So of course they're worried about posting their names. But where were you at the February 12th board meeting, when some 20 parents and students demonstrated in front of the Administration building? We certainly weren't anonymous. Neither were the 220 concerned parents who attended a previous meeting. Perhaps if you stuck your head out of your office to really meet the people you are paid to serve, you wouldn't need to watch a weather report to tell if it's raining outside.
Finally, if you don’t like what's said at durangoSchoolTalk, you should put this "snappy quote" on your computer monitor -- "Freedom of speech means the freedom to disagree."
Walter Venable
Illegitimi non carborundum
"Illegitimi non carborundum"
Nice one Walter!
Hey Uroda,
There are 5000 families in this county who have "Special Interests"
Their "Special Interests"? Their Kids!
I have always had an interest in School District 9-R, as I'm a graduate of Durango High School.
No one likes healthy debate more than I do. However, I'm saddened at the lack of civility in many of the comments posted on this blog.
Deborah Uroda and I had an opportunity to work together for many years and I learned so much from this talented woman. I have also seen first-hand the time she has devoted to the district. She has given the district a lot of extra hours and her professional skills have served us well.
When the bond issue and mill levy were initially presented to the community, it was predicted to fail. Deborah and many others in the district worked tirelessly to ensure the community was informed on the benefits of passing the bond issue and mill levy override. Our schools are better because this passed, overwhelmingly in every local precinct.
Because our children are our most precious commodity, no one will be the perfect leader or communicator, but we have, in my opinion, had some outstanding leadership over the years and our schools remain among the best in the state and nation. Have all the decisions been perfect and could things have been done better, probably. However, we are all human and we make mistakes from time to time. It is my personal belief that Deborah Uroda, in particular, has always tried to serve the school district and all of its constiuents to the best of her abilities. A lot of the time this is no easy feat as there are so many people who have opposing viewpoints. Nonetheless, I believe she has faced the challenges admirably.
I would encourage civility from everyone involved. It's okay to disagree and to want change things in our schools, but please do not attack people personally. And, please do not hide behind anonymity.
Deborah Uroda was above board in putting her name on a letter to the editor when she cited her opinion. I respect that.
Furthermore, I believe Deborah is a person of high integrity and a consumate professional. Please take time to focus on the issues and get away from the personal attacks.
Deborah doesn't need me to be her defender, but I am offended by the attacks on her character by what I would hope are well-intentioned people who want to make our schools better.
We can't always have our way and life isn't always fair, but please those of us who care about our schools, the children and their wonderful teachers, let's set an example on how adults should act and work together.
Sheri Rochford
Concerning the bond issue, please be aware of the deceptive and misleading advertising done to pass this bond. The public wasn't informed about the issues, it was mislead. A photo was taken depicting an overcrowded classroom. This photo was used in the brochure, but it was misleading. Even now, at least one school has many classrooms that sit empty and have since passing the bond. Did we need to expand the way we did or the way 9-R wanted us to? No. Were the taxpayers mislead? Absolutely. Did I witness it with my own eyes? Yes. When I realized how desperate 9-R was to pass this bond, even at the expense of honesty and truth in advertising, I came to the conclusion that 9-R does not honestly or openly communicate with its constituents. Not even close.
I'm sure Ms. Uroda has worked tirelessly for this district, as have teachers, parents, and community members. I know I have and I've done it without pay because I believed it was in the best interest of the kids. The difference is, though, Ms. Uroda has the truth, we don't.
9-R claimed people moved from the district because it was less expensive in Cortez and claimed this area was full of migrant farm workers when, in reality, Dr. Barter knew, absolutely knew, why the enrollment had fallen--because parents were tired of all the lies, red tape, and apathy toward our kids.
My personal experience is that 9-R is not truthful. I don't trust anything that comes from 9-R and after reading about all of the problems others have experienced in this district, I'm considering moving my children out. What a sad, sad commentary.
Sheri Rochford makes good points about civility. In any forum on public schools, (or other civic matters) I would trust her to listen attentively, until she felt fully informed about the various sides to any complex question.
Unfortunately, 9-R's scathing attack on writers to this website was extremely difficult to ignore for many, many reasons. Hard to know what the intent was, but it certainly felt to me like bullying.
My own issue is this: - with no safe public spaces to discuss concerns and share good ideas, individuals often withdraw from public life. While there are many outlets in our community for civic work, the public schools are the appropriate arena where we meet on common ground, with our children's future at stake.
My take on comments I've read here (and years of observing 9-R politics) is that concerns persist long after District Administrators believe they have been resolved. When people are willing to stay involved, the last thing 9-R should be doing is attacking them.
I urge those writing comments to keep focused on issues at hand (from curriculum to leadership) and not be sidetracked by the District's attack... even I can't help adding that it was "par for the course."
I don't get it. The entire freshmen class gets booed at a pep assembly, and the district dismisses it as just kids having fun. Deb Uroda gets booed on this blog spot and it's cyber-bullying and poor citizenship and she and her defenders won't stand for it.
A blog spot is like the school playground; there are few rules and not many teachers on duty. Bullies always pick on the kids who cry, even when they tattle. The question is, which is more disrespectful...harsh words from an anonymous source on a obscure blog spot or condemnatory rhetoric from the bully pulpit of 9R's Public Information Office in a letter to the editor?
Bill Bowlby
"Only mediocrities rise to the top in a system that won't tolerate wavemaking." Neil Postman
Tom Watkins is my hero. I would love him to be our Superintendent, but he has retired from that role. He writes below, and it gives me food for thought, because our school district always refers to "us" as parents with a "special interest axe to grind" -- I hope this article will give them food for thought, because they don't believe in ALL our children.
"Stop for a moment. Give it some thought. Then consider how many times in the last few weeks you have heard the following "rhetoric:"
# "Children are our most valuable resource;"
# "We don't have one child to waste in this state;"
# "Quality education is critical for ALL of our children;"
# "We value ALL of our children;" and
# "Children may make up a small percentage of our population, but they are 100 percent of our future."
http://www.hometownlife.com
/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=
/20070301/OPINION01/
703010757/1201/NEWS13
by Tom Watkins
Who really cares about our children? I mean ALL our children, not just those that are "biologically" yours. Do we truly care that some kids are not getting the education they need and deserve to be prepared to compete in the fast-paced, technologically-driven global society?
I just read that kids identified in the Gifted Program are entitled to an IEP. Is that true? I've never had an IEP for my kids in the G/T program.
RE: Gifted students
You should check with your son's teacher but a quick search of wikipedia produced this:
Individualized Education Plan (IEP): A written document that addresses the gifted student’s needs. It may include specific accommodations, materials or classroom instruction. IEPs are generally used with students with disabilities, who are required by law to have an IEP when appropriate. Most states are not required to have IEPs for students who are only identified as gifted. Some students may be intellectually gifted in addition to having learning and/or attentional disabilities, and may have an IEP that includes, for instance, enrichment activities as a means of alleviating boredom or frustration, or as a reward for on-task behavior. In order to warrant such an IEP, a student needs to be diagnosed with a separate emotional or learning disability that is not simply the result of being unchallenged in a typical classroom.
This is from the 9-R announcement of the new appointment of the Director of Student Support Services:
"Figueroa’s appointment coincides with a reorganization of district administrative duties that assigns the director of Student Support Services the new responsibility for directing all special education services in the district. Figueroa will be responsible for ensuring that special education and gifted-and-talented students are appropriately identified, that individual education plans are developed to meet their needs, and that students receive the educational support services to which they’re entitled."
Wouldn't that mean that all students identified as Gifted would need an IEP?
The Gifted Program is not functioning at the middle school or high school level. My daughter has never had an IEP and has not benefitted at all from the G/T program. Will this change with the new appointment?
ALP - Advance Learning Plans are being offered in 9-R as per Mary Barter; Key Communicator Meeting Feb 2007
Under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Gifted and Talented students have the same rights as Students with Specific Learning Disabilties. IEP's This is a federal program and can not be limited at the local level. Know your rights as parents and you too can gain the services for your children, they are entitled to .
The school won't offer this. You have to insist as a parent for your child's sake. Check out sjbocs.org for more information concerning Gifted and Talented services. Our district offers minimum services for advanced kids so become agressive as parents and educate yourself.
What parents don't know won't cost them anything!
Actually Weasel -- what parents don't know WILL cost them everything. Their kids education for a start!!
Unless of course, you meant what parents don't know won't cost 9-R anything!!
Re the Gifted and Talented program: Go to San Juan BOCES web page here: http://www.sjbocs.org/gt_contents.php
There are links to click on to give you the information you need.
"Procedural Guidelines for Referral Process
Students being considered for identification as gifted education must be brought to the attention of the Student Support/Intervention Team or Child Study Team at the Tier I Level."
Will Figueroa’s appointment make a difference? One would hope so, but the reality is, that San Juan BOCES have a job to do too -- and in my opinion (having read a letter from CDE to the former Director of Special Education about 4 years ago, which said we had too many children identified) BOCES job includes having only a certain number of children identified. Based on reading that letter Figueroa's hands will be tied.
You have to contact Randy Boyer at San Juan BOCES to discuss this with him, and give approval for your children to be tested into the program.
Don't delay. Talk to Randy on: 247-3261 Ext: 101.
P.S. The squeaky wheel gets the oil.
Don't wait for the procedure to find you; research, discuss with Randy, and then go after the procedure to ensure the best for your children.
Ask your school to tell you the names of other parents whose children are in the Gifted and Talented program. Then you can discuss it with parents too. It's a lot easier when you have other parents to help you through the steps.
If they won't tell you (confidentiality laws and all that), then you just hang out with parents at school and ask them direct!
Yes, I meant it won't cost 9-R anything.
I have realized over the years that I have aquired more knowledge concerning Exceptional Children and the services these students are entitled too under the law. Many times I feel more informed then staff. As I become educated as a parent it seems to cost sjbocs and the district more money. What I don't know as a parent won't cost the district a penny. It is a shame it always comes down to money.
I feel cheated--I've had a child identified in the G/T program for over 10 years and she's now graduating. What has she missed? What could I have done to make sure she had better services? Why didn't I know any of this before now? I guess I didn't know the right questions to ask.
Do you really think they predetermine how many kids can be identified?
Seems like there's a whole segment of our school society that isn't getting the education they are entitled to.
The last school I worked in based their funding formula on the hundred day count from the previous year. Based on the 100 day count, only a certain percentage of your school population could be slated for exceptional services...otherwise, you were "over-identifying," and would not receive federal monies for those students.
In 1975, when IDEA became PL 91-142 states protested this funding formula but were promised the Federal Government would help fund the program by up to 45% of the costs to states. Currently that percentage is somewhere in the teens.
The last school I worked in based their funding formula on the hundred day count from the previous year. Based on the 100 day count, only a certain percentage of your school population could be slated for exceptional services...otherwise, you were "over-identifying," and would not receive federal monies for those students.
In 1975, when IDEA became PL 91-142 states protested this funding formula but were promised the Federal Government would help fund the program by up to 45% of the costs to states. Currently that percentage is somewhere in the teens.
From what I understand, we have currently "over-identified" gifted kids. How does that happen? Do we say, "I'm sorry, you meet all the requirements and have tested into the program, but we can't allow you to be gifted at this time because there's simply too many of you." If there's too many gifted children, then why don't we raise the bar and teach them? Too many gifted children, or even bright children, shouldn't be a problem, it should be a great thing. We should be shouting from the roof tops that we have a high percentage of gifted kids instead of denying services to them.
I guess, unfortunately, it comes down to the fact that public education is adequate at best, certainly not stellar, and we need to accept it and live with it because it doesn't look like we'll ever change it. At least that's what it feels like.
To Anonymous -- I'm sorry you feel cheated. If your child is about to graduate -- how is she/he doing?!
This is my take on it: As a society, we are taught to trust our elders and betters (I'm English...this was my upbringing!) Therefore, as a parent, it is very hard to "step outside the box" and question anyone in authority, given that they know better.
It is my belief though, that we, the parent, know our children best. Therefore we must research, request and demand every thing that is available and more. My father would never have done what I have done for my son. He paid the fee's and let the school get on with it.
If your child is successful, despite apparently not getting much from the Gifted and Talented program, I wouldn't worry about it now. I'm sure you have done your best, and your child will go on to do his/hers.
You will have to ask Randy Boyer about under identifying Gifted and Talented/Special Ed. students.
Sadly, the bar, is very low. My son is dyslexic. For the first four years of being identified under an IEP.....(Individual Education Program).....the bar was at 50%. Every time I asked them to raise it to 100%, they wouldn't.
I wish I had never asked them to put him on an IEP. They simply didn't "get it". My son is dyslexic, not stupid. The bar should have been at 100%, with a scientifically proven method of teaching offered that would have remediated his reading age to grade level.
You are wrong at the end of your post! It takes a village to raise a child, and you/we can change education. Currently, Colorado State Law recognizes Dyslexia as a Specific Learning Disability, because "we" changed State Law. A brilliant politician (ex Congressman Mark Larson) and a lot of letter writing and research made that possible!
Parents can make a difference!
I'm glad things changed for your child. I'm glad you were successful in changing things for others as well.
My experience has been that things don't change much. Attending meetings, writing letters and emails, calling, and asking questions takes time and energy and, for the most part, does absolutely nothing but take time away from my family. For me, I just need to supplement what they get at school because I truly don't expect anyone to listen to my concerns. They might pretend to listen (or worse tell you they aren't listening), but in the end, nothing happens. And, I'm only one of many, many parents who feel this way. That's part of the big problem with 9-R, parents don't feel like their opinions matter and they get tired of constantly trying to make things better only to find that their time is wasted. That's why there's so little trust in the administration. Until something changes at the top, it will be the same old story at the bottom.
Read the newspaper tomorrow -- things have changed.
http://www.durangoherald.com/
breaking_news/breaking_news_article_generation.asp?article=1
9-R superintendent hints she may be terminated
School Board President resigns saying other members plot to fire Mary Barter
Wednesday 9:03 p.m.
By Chuck Slothower
Herald Staff Writer
Durango 9-R School Disrict Superintendent Mary Barter’s job hung tenuously in the balance Wednesday amid explosive allegations of secret school-board meetings and a plot by a majority of the board to fire her.
Board President Mike Matheson said five of seven school board members had met secretly during the past week to plan firing Barter, superintendent of Durango School District 9-R since 1999.
Matheson resigned, saying he could not lead a board that broke state law and its own policies.
Board members denied they had met secretly, but acknowledged dissatisfaction with Barter.
Barter said – contrary to rumor – that she had not resigned or been fired, and did not intend to resign.
It was unclear Wednesday how long Barter would remain superintendent. Only the school board has the power to fire her, and her contract extends through June 30, 2008.
The board announced a special meeting set for 5:30 p.m. Thursday, but board members said it will likely be delayed until Monday.
Those five members of our school board are honest and good. They have dedicated approximately 15+ years to our children, our teachers, and our district.
For someone to sully their names is a disgrace.
Who are the 5 board members who have been sullied by Mike Matheson?
Since Jeff Schell is mentioned in Matheson's letter of resignation to the media, obviously he is one.
Who could the other four be?
Mark Seiter?
Cindy Brevik?
Floyd Patterson?
Melissa Youssef?
Bruce Anderson?
Or was it really six in total?
The reason Dr. Barter will not resign is very clear: she wants the money that comes from being in the position for 10 years. Pretty simple. She wants the money. She's demonstrated over and over again her unwillingness to listen to the parents, community members, or even the kids so it isn't that she wants to continue to work with us, she wants the money. How very, very sad.
Give her the money. It's not worth destroying administrator, teacher, parent, and student moral.
The superintendent is brilliant and clever. Her letter to "Dear Colleagues" -- says she doesn't know if the board will terminate her contract or not.
It's a win/win either way for her. Either the board keep her, and all the mistrust will fester, or they can fire her.
Fire her. Put in an interim. Search for a new high school principal first. Then go after a new superintendent. Let's get the community behind this, and start afresh.
We need truth, justice and transparency. Not these clever games played out in the media by Mr. Matheson and Dr. Barter.
Mike Matheson: "My personal credibility is on the line here," he said. "I'll stand on my record."
What record?
Rotarians don't resign from public office (they call their Realtor and ask to move boundaries!)....they certainly don't smear honest, dedicated, hard working members of the community who volunteered to be on the school board for 15-16 years between them, on their way out.
I'm glad he has resigned. He wasn't a good president anyway.
He beat his own derogatory comments about Renee Parsons. He said in a work session on 1/9: "If anyone can tell me how Renee Parsons is helping the City".......
Well -- can anyone tell me how Mr. Matheson helped our school district?
Mr. Matheson should apologize to the community and our School Board for his allegations.
I am confident that the five members of the School Board did not commit any act that would bring disrepute to our School District. They are hardworking, dedicated, volunteer elected officials.
In today's Herald, Mr. Matheson is quoted as saying that "he did not know whether board members had actually met".
Yesterday's exposé said: "Durango school board President Mike Matheson abruptly resigned Wednesday and accused board members of meeting illegally."
Which is it Mike?
Mr. Matheson's resignation letter released to the media on Wednesday says: "...a five member majority of the board had been meeting outside of a properly noticed and convened meeting of the Board of Education over the last week". Albeit, Mr. Matheson suggests that Jeff Schell supposedly "informed" Matheson of this piece of information.
Dr. Barter and Mr. Matheson picked on the wrong man. Matheson's accusations named a man whose reputation is beyond reproach; someone known for being honest and truthful, a listener who has worked hard since arriving on the board to create openness and civility. Jeff Schell is that man.
On the other hand, to quote Mike Matheson from last fall's selection process to fill an open seat vacated by Joel Jones: "This was a very tough decision. One candidate brought this to a split vote. Three thought Gene (Giddings) was it. Split board. I thought it better to have a unanimous vote. It was an extremely tough decision."
In my opinion, it would appear that anything less than unanimity makes Mike extremely uncomfortable. As the public tries to understand his recent attacks on colleagues, maybe this is a clue. Why serve as a public representative if you cannot accept other opinions brought to the table?
Democracy anyone?
If Dr. Barter truly cared about this district and about these kids, she'd do the right thing. She'd resign and let us move forward. I think by her refusal to resign (as stated to the Herald yesterday), she makes it more than obvious that she's not in this for the kids, the parents, or the good of the district. She's in it for the money. Greed is more important than the education of our children and the good of the district. Don't most administrators begin as teachers? Why do they seem to suffer from amnesia once their title changes?
Post a Comment