THIS IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY! PLEASE DO NOT TAKE THIS AS AN ATTACK ON THE PTO. THE PTO HAS DONE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF GOOD FOR THE WPS AND SHOULD BE COMMENDED FOR IT. Anthony Walker
by Anthony Walker
However, early this morning, around 12:15AM I was at the WMS picking up my 8th grader from her class trip to Washington DC. Upon pulling into the school parking lot, I was approached by a woman representing the PTO with 2 flyers. One flyer, printed on gray paper, was advocating a NO vote on the June 9th petition. It was funded by the Advocates for the Duly Elected - John Leavitt (John is an Admin on this blog as well; italics modified by Admin). I have absolutely no issue with the flyer or with handing it out. It is democracy at it’s finest. I may not agree with the position, but that is what healthy debate is all about. I do have an issue with the other flyer. It was on goldenrod paper and from the Woodstock PTO. It too was advocating a position on the June 9th petition. I was so bothered by it, after picking up my daughter, I asked the woman (and I did not get her name) who gave it to me about the PTO’s position.
I asked specifically, how was it decided that the PTO should take a political stand on this issue? Answer: In the PTO by-laws it states that the Woodstock PTO can take a political stance on any issue they see fit.
I asked, how was this campaign financed? Answer: A portion of the dues and fundraising done each year is set aside off the top for political issues. She further went on to say that this is about educating the parents, not advocating a position.
I then asked, isn’t the money raised better spent on direct aid to the students? Like installing a new gym floor at the WES? Deferring the cost of field trips? Having more field trips to enrich the education process? Not printing flyers and lawn signs? Answer: The PTO is not advocating a position. The board votes on how to spend the money. It’s in the by-laws. I certainly do not disagree with a board having the power to spend money, that is one of the primary reasons for being there.
My 1st issue with the PTO and this campaign is that the PTO is not educating parents on the June 9th referendum, it is advocating a position. If it were educating, the flyer would have said something like “there is a vote on June 9th regarding the composition of the BOE. Please talk with your neighbors, read the newspaper, etc. to get yourself informed and go vote.” Instead, it very clearly, at the top, states “The Woodstock PTO asks you to please VOTE NO on Tuesday, June 9, 2009″.
My 2nd issue with the PTO and this campaign is that I believe the PTO should be a non-political entity. I was under the impression it was, but based on what I am hearing from members, the by-laws allow it to be. The PTO should be bringing parents and teachers together to focus on the education of the children, not political causes. The PTO should not be involved in any election unless it is to educate the kids on what elections are etc. Not advocating a position.
My 3rd issue with the PTO and this campaign is that part of the money raised is going to political issues. Every single penny should be spent on the kids. Whether this petition passes or not, the kids will not be direly affected. This petition will not bring teacher cuts, classroom cuts or anything else.
My 4th issue with this PTO and this campaign is that they have used my, and your, children as political fundraisers. Each year, my children come home with fundraising campaigns from the PTO (I believe butter braids and wrapping paper are the most popular). Again, each time I have bought these items, I have felt that the money was going to the kids and the schools, not politics. Why not have the kids raise money for the CPS? RTC? DTC?
I thought that the Woodstock PTO was similar to the WEF, non-political. I guess I was wrong.
There are some who will read this along with my other post and say that I am angry because the PTO is advocating a position different than mine. That is simply untrue. I am OK with people not agreeing with me. I am not OK with organizations who state that their mission is help the kids and then divert monies that were raised for the purpose of helping the kids to political causes.
There are some who will read this and say that I am attacking the PTO. Again, nothing could be further from the truth. I think that up until this particular incident, the PTO has done a tremendous job and should be complemented for it. They have stepped up for the kids more than the town has at times. I’ve said it before, anyone who volunteer’s their time for the better of the community should be commended.
I would ask that in August, before next school year’s fundraising starts, the PTO send out a copy of their by-laws in the backpacks of our children. With education on the PTO by-laws, parents can make an informed decision on whether to allow their children to raise money for a political organization.
Again, I ask that you not read this as an attack on the PTO as it is not intended to be, but I do think that they got this one wrong and overstepped their mission on this one.
I believe that the PTO has taken a position on this referendum because of their majority belief that recalling the BOE is terribly destructive to the school system. There are many that look at this as a vendetta against the school system by a small few and that removal of the elected BOE members is truly destructive.
I think that part of the answer can be found in the assumptions you are making about this measure and about the PTO’s actions. I believe you should challenge your underlying assumptions and this alone may clear up the apparent conflict/confusion. The Petitioners and supporters have made an effort to characterize this entire matter in THEIR terms, labels and modes of understanding. Those are mere opinions - assumptions - and are not shared universally nor are they automatically ‘Correct’. If the assumptions are NOT correct, then the PTO is acting in a manner far differently than you have described.
Simply put, the PTO may not see this matter in the same way you have characterized it - they may not even see it as a ‘Political’ matter (I sure don’t see it as a ‘political’ matter, but an end-run on the political process). The PTO may also realize that due to the actions of 29 or 38 Petitioners, this Vote deadline is forced upon the town and they are given only enough time to make a recommendation (and rely on their reputation for honesty, good judgement, etc.).
In the spirit of your inquiry, consider that perhaps the PTO believes that this measure is, in essence, merely a negative force that has appeared in town and which needs to be dealt with appropriately - think of any number of examples where they have behaved this way in the past and ask whether your critical inquiry applies with equal validity to those situations. It does seem to be all about the underlying, biased assumptions and about WHO has the power to do the Labeling and Characterizing of the entire matter.
I believe that the PTO is acting in accordance with it’s collective conscience: publicly disagreeing with what it sees as wrongful action by a small group and the PTO is merely advocating an action (’Vote No’) which addresses this action. Nothing Political about any of that. Remember, it is the Petitioners and supporters themselves who strive to characterize this matter as a ‘political’ one - many honest citizens have always disagreed that it represents ‘Democracy’ in any valid form.
If the PTO were to see any other wrongful or negative ‘action’ which affects education and which you did NOT deem a Political Issue, would you object to this same behavior by them?
Dear Tony
Instead of finding fault in the PTO’s endorsement of a “no” vote, I would think you would be irritated by 38 people who want to unseat the Board of Education en masse. The PTO’s backing of the Board of Ed, in this issue, speaks volumes. This is what I think you are REALLY annoyed about. There are countless other ways to get noticed that are far more satisfying. I suggest you discover one.
Tony - Welcome to Woodstock. What you are seeing is the confounding reality of how things are generally done in other places in the world and how they are done in Woodstock. If you don’t shelve your expectations and stop to look around and really figure out what goes on here, you’re going to give yourself a coronary. You’re not in Kansas anymore. Nothing here is up front and straightforward. Navigation will be fairly treacherous if you don’t start questioning the information you are using and understanding how your perspective colors your expectations.
“My 3rd issue with the PTO and this campaign is that part of the money raised is going to political issues. Every single penny should be spent on the kids. Whether this petition passes or not, the kids will not be direly affected. This petition will not bring teacher cuts, classroom cuts or anything else. “- Mr. Walker
I have to disagree with you on this issue. I along, with evey teacher I’ve spoken with, believe this could have a serious negative effect on the children’s education. The group is making an effort to supplant the current board with one that is very anti-education. This could be catastrophic.
I feel you have bought the argument that this is simply about restructuring the numbers and term limits of the board. This really has nothing to do with that. They are just using that as an excuse to remove a pro-education board and replace it with one that is not. Possibly with one that is more sympathetic to their constant frivolous lawsuits.
This petition group claims to be for progressive education. However, the main operators behind this petition are for nothing of the sort. Unless ‘progressive education’ means larger class sizes, underfunded programs, and lack of adequate resources, that is.
Please, don’t vote ‘no’ on June 9th for the benefit of the board, administrators, or teachers. Vote ‘NO’ on June 9th for the benefit of the children.
Con – Let me try to address your points here. Whether the petitioners or others on this site have made this political, I’m not sure. It was on this site that the comments about this being a recall have been echoed, as well as by SOME, not all, of the petitioners so this has become a political issue. No ifs, ands or buts about it.
Now I do disagree that the PTO is merely advocating action. If that were the case, the flyer would have said something about educating yourself or just saying there is an upcoming vote. By publishing it as “THE PTO ASKS YOU TO VOTE NO”, this is advocating a position. That is my issue. The kids are sent out to raise monies to support programs throughout the year to benefit their education. I would be OK if the PTO was just trying to educate here, but it is advocating a political position and to me, that is not OK. I don’t want my child raising money for any political campaign.
Now, if you disagree that this is a political campaign, I’m willing to suspend my belief that it is for a moment and agree with you that it is not, and ask you this question: Since it is NOT a political campaign, would you be ok with another organization using the kids to raise money for advocating actions? Would it be ok for the kids to raise money for the CPS?
My whole point is that I believe the PTO overstepped their mission when educating turned to advocating.
Chicklet – I don’t see this petition as a way to unseat the board en masse. As I have stated, 6 years is too long for any elected official. Be it BOE, BOF or the US Senate. I would be ok with keeping the current board and only electing 1 seat for 2009 instead of 3. I would also be ok with automatically changing the terms of existing members, should they agree to get 4-year staggered terms. Unfortunately, neither of those options is available since that is not how the State wrote the statue. Would you be ok with keeping the current board but modifying terms and only electing 1 member in 2009? I’m not sure what you mean by getting noticed. Could you please explain?
Another Admin – Thanks for the advice. I just don’t understand why in a town of 8000 or so, with a budget of only $10M, things need to get so personal. We need to keep our collective “eye” on the prize here, getting our kids the best education possible. I grew up in a small town very close to Woodstock so I am used to “small town New England politics”.
Teacher’s POV – Even if this petition passes, I would hope that the majority of BOE members would choose to stand again. That would not be very disruptive or catastrophic. It would be the best of both worlds. I’m not sure who would, and I’m not sure if the respective town committee’s would nominate them, but I, as 1 voter, would not be opposed to it. Whatever the petitioner’s intentions are, I have only heard from a handful of the signers that have publicly stated what their intension are, there are many more names on that list that have not publicly stated what their intentions are, the issue is now before us and we have the duty to investigate, debate, vote and implement the vote either way. After that process is complete, I would hope that we could move forward from here. There have been plenty of catalysts in history to make a populace stop, review and either reaffirm or modify policies, procedures and the like. I simply view this petition as a catalyst.
Anthony Walker
Notwithstanding the fact that my family and I have lived here for a relatively short period of time and really love the community…(see The Outsider’s new article. Admin).