by PTO Mom
I realize that it was very late at night when I handed you the PTO flyer Mr. Walker, but you missed a lot of what I said, due to the fact that it was hard for me to get a word in edgewise with you. You were very obviously upset that the PTO chose to weigh in on this issue, and your statement that you would no longer support the PTO is unfortunate.
Since I am the other half of your conversation, I would like the opportunity to correct some of the statements you have attributed to me.
By law we cannot spend more than $1,000 on printing and materials for advocating our position on this referendum. Last school year (07-08) we spent over $29,000 on field trips and special events for both schools, and like any business we are required to have insurance coverage, and have operating expenses as well. So it is not possible for an organization like ours to truly “spend every single penny solely on the kids.” What we are able to do with our funding (I think) is a very important supplement to the school’s budget. When you compare the under $1,000 we have spent on some signs and photocopies, it’s a drop in the bucket compared to what we have funded throughout the school year.
You DID ask me specifically, how it was decided that the PTO should take a stand on this issue? But you did not hear my answer correctly, and I most certainly did NOT say “we can take a political stand on any issue we see fit.” I don’t know who said that to you, but it was NOT me. I told you that the PTO “had announced a special meeting of all its paid members, we discussed what if anything we should do about this petition, and the majority voted to take a stand on it.”
As background - Signs had just been placed around town saying “Vote yes for EDUCATION” and we do not see any benefits to the education of the students in Woodstock, should this referendum pass. There is nothing wrong with the system as it is set up now. So the majority of PTO members at that meeting voted that we should take a stand on this topic and try to educate parents on what the potential outcomes of this vote could really mean – like the entire BOE all terminating on November 2, 2009 and a brand new board being elected with 2 fewer members to do the same amount of work.
You are a very fast talker, even at 1am. I know that we are advocating a position on this question, we are asking for a NO vote. I was trying to explain to you that I also see our role as a PTO to be educating parents on important issues that will directly affect their children’s education. I resent the following statement you attribute to me, because this is NOT at all how I answered you: “The PTO is not advocating a position. The board votes on how to spend the money. It’s in the by-laws.”
You are most definitely trying to characterize the PTO in a negative light and I take personal offense to that. What you have written is an attack on the PTO - no ifs, ands, or buts about it. We are a group of parents who VOLUNTEER our time and energy to try to raise money to help fund field trips and extras that the kids would otherwise go without, like purchasing musical instruments for the band, renting the Hyde School for their concerts, or paying for cool assembly performers to come to school.
Our members DO vote on how to spend the PTO’s money, no one person has the authority to decide how funds will be spent. We have a budget, and a democratic process by which we spend our funds.
I tried to clarify to you that my understanding is that WEF has written into their By Laws that they cannot take a side on an issue (at least that is what I have been told), but that “we do not have anything written in our By Laws that prevents us from being able to take a stand on an issue” that we feel can directly affect the quality of the school system in our town.
In trying to address your questions, I was trying to say that we have money left over in our budget every year, so absorbing $1,000 in unexpected costs is not a hard thing for us to do. We do not fundraise specifically for “politics,” and we do not budget specifically for “political issues.” By state statute, a PTO cannot fundraise or advocate for either a political party or a candidate. We can however, advocate for a position on a referendum question which we feel could affect the schools.
I wanted to explain to you that the last time the PTO got involved in taking a side on an issue was 4 years ago, but I don’t believe I got the chance to say that. Unless we, as an organization, feel strongly that something is going to hurt/benefit the schools, we stay out of it. This referendum question COULD hurt the school – even you must be able to see the potential for that if a whole new board of 7 unexperienced people were elected?!
This small group of petitioners has set out to confuse parents and trick them into voting for their petition by attaching it to a big trigger word - “EDUCATION.” They have tried to undermine the confidence of the community in our Superintendent by fabricating a story of a “vote of no confidence” that NEVER took place, they have said that MOST BOEs in CT have 7 members or fewer – which is also UNTRUE. Parents are confused, and were looking to us to help them figure out what the best position would be. After much thought and discussion, we believe that a NO vote is the best solution for our schools, our town, but most importantly, our kids.
No one has a crystal ball, and can say with certainty that some of the same smart and talented BOE members that are currently serving us would be re-elected, supported by their current parties, or even choose to run again. They were already duly elected and should be allowed to serve their terms. Period.
I know we have taken a stance on this topic by asking for a NO vote, but our first and foremost mission has been to help clarify the confusion that the “yes for Education” signs have caused. I think you have misrepresented my statements that I was trying to make to you to bolster your own argument. You kept going on and on about the PTO having money to pay for a pipe bursting in the school, and field trips, the gym floor, etc. I said a pipe bursting would be a fixed asset the town should pay for not the PTO – and you jumped on that and said “Well what about the gym floor?”, and I also said I thought the town should pay for that too, and you jumped on that point too and said “Yeah but the PTO paid for it!” YES! The PTO helped to pay for the gym floor because the voters in this town refused to support it being bonded. Elementary aged students were unable to RUN during GYM class because the floor was so slippery and dangerous. We decided that since we had already raised the remaining funds necessary to replace it, we would not wait for the town to come up with a way to pay for it.
Of course I did not get to answer you completely, because you very quickly would jump onto something else. I’m surprised you heard anything I said at all quite frankly, and as I tried to answer what you would throw at me, you would go on to something else. I could see that you were not going to really hear what I had to say, and ultimately I chose to walk away from your car. I only wish I had walked away sooner.
There is no need for us to send home our By Laws to parents at the start of the school year because they are posted right on our website. Our website is: www.woodstockpto.com.
PTO Mom -
As I have said several times here, my original post WAS NOT an attack on the PTO, however, I did not know that my children were being used to raise money for an organization that can advocate for anything. I would be happy to have my kids raise money for the WEF, since they have it in their by-laws that they can not advocate for any political issue. Whether we like it or not, and I don’t, this has become a political issue.
I do not agree with your portrayal of me not wanting to listen to your answers. I was willing to listen, what I didn’t want was double-speak, which is what I got. You never mentioned that the spending was limited to $1000 (not that it would have mattered). I understand that non-profits need to have liability insurance and the like, but spending even $1000 on advocating a position, in my opinion, for the PTO is WRONG. THIS IS JUST MY OPINION. I would feel the SAME WAY if I agreed with the PTO’s position. That is $1000 that did not go to help defray the cost of an 8th grade student that could not afford to go on the Washington trip, that is $1,000 that did not help defray the costs of other class trips, that is $1,000 that did not go for additional classroom supplies.
Do you understand my point, it has nothing to do with the actual position of the PTO, but the fact that money was diverted and spent on the referendum instead of the kids.
A lot of the people posting here have said they are afraid loosing the entire board and sitting a totally new one. I know it is possible, but do you think that will really happen? I don’t. I think that, in the end, if this passes, they may be a few, at the most, new members.
A I’ve stated before and let me be very clear. I THINK THAT THE PTO HAS DONE A LOT OF GOOD FOR THE SCHOOLS. I DO NOT THINK THAT THE SCHOOL BUDGET SHOULD BE CUT, BUT INSTEAD THE MONEY BE SPENT IN A DIFFERENT WAY. Please don’t “read” into any of my comments. I’m a straightforward guy.
Anthony Walker
Mr. Walker, Where have you been. This petition is the culmination of years of harrassment of the BOE by Powers, Shultz, and Rosendahl. Why would any of these BOE members (excepting Rosendahl) want to continue to subject themselves to this continuing assault if the voters don’t back them up with a NO vote?
“Straight forward guy”?? Did you tell the PTO that you had “Vote Yes for Education” signs on your property??!
Arne -
Because, presumably, they want to continue to better the education offered in Woodstock and would want to continue the work they have already started.
There will always be people that disagree with what any board does. There will always be people that are difficult to deal with. There will always be people that are not happy with the answers they have gotten and push for more. That is just part of what any member of any board has to deal with.
Anthony Walker
Anthony, You are either very naive or dishonest. Do you honestly believe that Kevin will be renominated by the DTC given that Kaeding (the chair), Powers and Wholean control the DTC?
Just for the record the PTO has NOT spent $1,000! We are limited to spending $1,000 by the State Election Enforcement Commission rules. I don’t know the actual amount spent to date, but it is LESS than $1,000. I know this may sound like semantics, but every dollar that is spent is carefully analyzed and weighed and we are trying to limit the amount spent on this issue to the greatest extent possible.
Tony enough, already!. You look like a real bully. The PTO mom’s story is very credible. Keep your signs and vote your way, and leave other people to vote theirs. Stop defending a defenseless position.
Tim -
No I did not send a memo to the PTO saying that I had a sign on my lawn. Didn’t know that I had to. Duly noted. My problem with the PTO is not the side of the issue they took, but that they took a side. I was under the impression they were neutral.
Arne -
While I don’t always agree with Kevin, I would hope that the DTC would renominate him. We don’t need a board that agrees with each other all the time. Without some level of disagreement, there would be no debate.
Anthony Walker
Dear PTO Mom,
I have been reading these posts made by Tony and yourself. You stated that the majority of the PTO was in agreement. I was just curious as to what the majority was? Was there a well represented group at the meeting?
You state in your letter that the “Yes” vote will adversly affect our children. Are you implying that any person who is elected to the BOE in the future would not do a good job?
Interested Mom
Interested Mom, I won’t speak for PTO Mom but there have been plenty of articles here about how this recall of the BOE will adversely affect the performance of the BOE which ultimately affects the performance of the school system. As Kevin has already pointed out, it has taken him a year and a half to come up to speed and he’s still learning (even though he’s a very smart man). All institutional memory will be lost.
The best summation of how this recall will adversely affect the school system can be found here:
http://www.woodstockctcafe.com/2009/05/15/letter-endorsed-by-the-board-of-education-to-the-woodstock-community/
I think the PTO’s position has really helped a lot of parents and townspeople sort through the truth about this referendum. I think the PTO mom’s post makes perfect sense. Again, there is no arguing that the PTO will act in the best interests of our kids. I think Tony can’t handle this fact. It’s OK for those that Tony is aligned with, to include the tag line “for education” on their signs asking people to vote “yes”, but it’s not OK for the PTO -to ask anyone to vote “no”. Sounds like a poor sport, dirty player mentality to me. PTO Mom: don’t continue to post back and forth with Tony. Your done, and he should be as well.
Mr Walker, like the rest of his kind, tend to take great liberties with “quoting” others, another reason why I think they are all fast talking liars. If they were only selling cars….
Please explain to me what “like the rest of his kind” means when you are insulting Tony. I have been reading this sight to get more educated on which way to vote. I know that this is a blog, and people can write whatever they choose, however, if someone disagrees, is it customary to insult? I would find your point much more educated without insulting.
Another question I have and I hope the many readers of this site can answer….
How can school grounds be used as a political site for sending information. Can any group go and pass out flyers on topics that are very compelled by?
What about the saftey of our children?
Interested Mom
Not to pour fuel on the fire here, but in case anyone’s curious…the infamous “no confidence or not” letter is now posted at the WT website.
I’d like to hear people’s thoughts on it. It’s definitely not an official, union-style no confidence letter. But it’s not a happy commendation either.
Newcomer, Rather than asking for opinions of others, what is YOUR opinion? What’s the significance of the letter? This letter was discussed in some detail on WINY this morning by representatives of the school system.
Mom,
“His kind” refers to the folks that continually mis-quote, take text out of context and obfuscate in order to attempt to make their point. Read through all the threads and see how many times the “yes” folks have been caught mis-stating facts.
I don’t insult folks until they get my Irish up.
The safety of our children in in jeopardy because the PTO supports the BOE?
Chicklet _
I was going to let your post go and not respond but I don’t like it when people speak for me. Lord knows I have a big enough voice to speak for myself.
This is going to be the second time I ask that you actually go back and read my original PTO post. I think that the PTO does a tremendous amount of things for the kids. I just think that they got this one wrong. Is it not ok to disagree? As I have said, even if I agreed with the stance of the PTO, I still think they should stay out of politics. Plan and simple. They should, in my opinion and this is only MY opinion, stay out of politics. That is all. It has nothing to do with what side of the issue they are on, mine or the opposing. I don’t know how to state that more clearly.
I have no issue with the other vote no signs. No one asked my kids to raise money for them. I have no issues with the Citizen’s for the Duly Elected. Whatever activities they are doing is not being funded out of money that was raised with the kids involved or in mind. Don’t make this out as though I am against the PTO. I AM NOT. The PTO does a tremendous amount of good for the WPS.
Anthony Walker
firefighter,
I am not trying to get your Irish up. I am posing the question, if I read other posts correctly, that not just the PTO flyers were handed out when the kids returned from th D.C. trip.
As there are other valid and important issues to educate people and parents about, can anyone be at the school handing out flyers? There are a few important national topics that I feel very strongly about. Could I go make photocopies before school gets out?
That is what I am trying to ask….if anyone can hand out flyers, could the saftey of our children be jepordized?
Interested Mom
Admin,
I wasn’t aware that school representatives were going to be on WINY. I would have definitely tuned in if I had known. I don’t know what to make of it all. I mean, Rosendahl did clarify that he was in error and it wasn’t technically a no confidence letter. How did the WT blog get the letter? Rosendahl called on Dr. Baran to release it, so is that what happened? I don’t know. Having missed the WINY discussion, all that I have to go on is Dr. Baran insisting there’s no letter. and he’s technically right. There is not a no confidence letter. But there is a letter of some sort. Call it disappointment, disapproval, whatever. Did he make this dsitinction publicly and let people know that a letter of some sort existed?
It’s tough to decide with only part of the story to go on. I’ve only listened to WINY once and that was because the other blog posted that they would be on it. If I had seen a simliar post or advertisement about the school reps going on the air, I would have tuned in online to hear them too. I also missed Dr. Baran and Mrs. Paul. Am I the only one who isn’t glued to WINY in this town, or what?
Mom,
I’m not speaking for the PTO, but I’m guessing the parents were speaking to other parents as the kids were returning. I wasn’t there, my kids weren’t returning from DC. It doesn’t seem like a “rally”. I’m against political gatherings at the school, just like you appear to be.
PTO flyers were handed to parents on school grounds(the “P” in PTO). I don’t see that as a problem.
I had to chuckle when Tony said he doesn’t like it when people speak for him. Awwwww
Newcomer, Since you have read the letter and have read everything published at the two blog sites, what is your opinion about the significance of the letter? Is it of great importance in justifying the recall of the Board of Education?
How they got a copy of the letter is irrelevent to its significance. You could assume that it came from one of the multitude of FOIA requests which we will publish after the referendum.
Admin,
I forgot to address one of your questions to me, namely, what’s the significance of the letter. To me, that hinges on whether one of the teacher commentators here is correct or not. One of them said that it was a one time event and everything’s since been resolved and now all is hunky-dory between the admin, BOE, and teachers. If that’s the correct account of it, then there’s little to no significance to the letter. If Dr. Baran and/or the BOE openly released the letter to the public to read for ourselves, then that would carry great weight with me that it was a one-time thing and not a big deal.
Who were the reps who went on WINY today? Were any of them WAT reps? The thing that troubles me the most in all of this “who’s advocating for whom” discussion is this: where are the teachers? Where’s the WAT with a public stance on it? Shouldn’t they weigh in most of all? The PTO is a group of dedicated, concerned parents. So we have the point of view of a group of very involved parents to consider. And we have a citizen group supporting ‘vote no’ and a petitioner citizen group supporting ‘vote yes’. But why is the teachers’ union remaining silent? If they’ve come out publicly, please let me know because I’m not aware of it and they are the ones I would most like to hear from. I would like the WAT officially to tell me what they intended when they sent that letter to Dr. Baran and if they are currently completely happy, if they still have concerns, or are they somewhere in between. I wouldn’t have to guess or rely on others’ opinions if I could hear it first hand. If the WAT still feels that Dr. Baran is not listening to them, then I would take that under serious consideration indeed. But I want first-hand info on the matter. Reading that letter for myself, it raises a red flag. In and of itself, it isn’t enough to sawy me. But it’s enough to make me carefully deliberate and not just buy into one side or the other’s characterizations.
I just read the letter after newcomer said it was there. I too am disappointed and am led to wonder what else is being hidden from us? Baron clearly denied a letter ever existed. “No-confidence” or not, I don’t believe that he is being totally upfront with the people of Woodstock. I wonder how the teachers are feeling about this. Are they still disappointed with the admin?
Didn’t listen o WINY either. This is indeed big, could sway my vote.
You’ve asked 5 questions here. Since we don’t represent the disparate parties we obviously can’t answer your questions. Contact WAT and the teachers union and report back to the Cafe. It was Paul Coutu I believe (the WINY host) who wanted to focus on the Letter and thus those who participated in the show addressed the significance of the letter. Hopefully someone who listened to the show can answer your first 2 or 3 questions.
Not that anyone wants to hear it, but I’m not viewing this the same as many others on both sides, I guess. I don’t agree with Tony Walker that it’s about length of terms of service. I think it’s a recall. I watched the two videos of Avis Spalding and Fran Stevens on the other blog. It was interesting to hear Mr. Stevens discuss this whole board recall option and I believe the videos were shot during the whole 9th grade hold-back business. I didn’t see a date on them, but even I could tell from the context of what was being said.
So, now I’ve decided it’s a recall. Next step is to decide if I’m OK with that or not. I asked Craig Powers about this (publicly on the blog, I think) and his reply was that it was done in this way to get attention; that if the petitioners had waited for the current terms to expire, it would have gone unnnoticed. I have to say that I agree with that. Unfortunately, I seriously doubt that we would be having such vigorous discussions, with new contributors as well, had this not gotten to be such a big issue. So it’s true after all, I guess. Unless something big is going on, not everyone pays attention.
Still not sure I’m OK with that though. So on to the next point to consider. Is this just another form of harassment or is there anything to this? It worries me when people come up with a quick answer to this one. I’ve given this a lot of thought and actually, the video of Avis was interesting to me in this regard. To hear her discuss her time on the board (back when) and how it was all done through volunteerism. I’ve heard other people in town say similar things (about the volunteerism). I didn’t get the impression from watching Avis Spalding that she’s part of some evil empire that wants to ruin K-8 and give all of K-8’s money to the Academy. She sounded like she cared very much about K-8 but that it was long recognized that people had to pitch in to get things for K-8. I’m presuming that’s because Prop 46 is not new and neither is the public funding of WA. But to hear her tell it, K-8 didn’t go without because people in the community pitched in to make sure they didn’t go without. Then all of sudden, a different group of folks with a different philosophy sweeps into town. And they feel that taxes should provide for K-8 and people should not be relied upon to pitch in. And they feel ifferently about Prop 46 and WA as well. So when I consider all of this, I wonder if that Mr. Cotou from WINY wasn’t correct. He was the host last week when the petitioners appeared on his show. He’s not even a Woodstock resident and he’s a former teacher so he seems like a good neutral source to me. He said he felt that this whole problem was lack of communication. I would add poor and negative communication to that as well and it goes both ways.
I think this is why the petitioners feel this whole issue is about control. They feel that this board is and has been trying to significantly alter the way things have always been done in Woodstock; fixing what isn’t broken, if you will. Ironically, the board may feel it’s about control as well - their lack of it due to the circumstances we commonly discuss. And if you look at some of these discussions going on on both blogs, some of them are also about control. So now I’m looking at this from a control angle. And one of my concerns is that I do see hints of either Dr. Baran and/or the BOE grappling for control. That may not be a bad thing but it concerns me when I hear people say things like, “Dr. Baran won’t let the teachers speak”. I certainly don’t want to believe such a thing. But have we heard from them in the midst of something so major such as this referendum? Also, what about allowing parents onto committees or forming new committees that allow for parental involvement? The other side is saying they will advocate for that. Will this BOE do the same or will they wait until a bunch a parents band together and go to a meeting to request it?
I don’t think this about only Powers and Shultz. I think it’s oversimplistic to assume that. There are other people who signed that peition and they may well have their own different reasons for doing it. I don’t think that Powers and Shultz will be disappointed if the yes vote wins either. but for me, this volunteerism that Avis talked about is the kicker. It’s still the situation with K-8. Because WA is staying unchanged, as is Prop 46, then K-8’s situation remains unchanged. they still need volunteers and creative means to get what they need - same as they always have. Only now we have such a divided community, it’s tougher to see how that can happen. And here we find ourselves with this referendum.
I’m still stuck. And at this 11th hour, I’m still open to sincere debate and discussions about it. The entire thing’s a damned shame though, regardless of what side you’re on.
Newcomer - There is no way that everybody can be telling the truth. Either the letter was a letter of no confidence or it was not. The point is that Rosendahl represented it as such, period. It is not up to us to try and figure out what it really was. When told there was a letter of no confidence signed by 60 teachers, Dr. Baran spent time investigating whether or not there was. His investigation determined there was not. He didn’t go looking for anything that might have been what Rosendahl was talking about.
If I asked you if you had ever had a car accident (and you hadn’t), would you respond, “No, but I did have a a flat tire once.”
A letter of no confidence is an accusation of incompetency/dereliction of duty and the threshold of such an accusation in the professional world is very high. It does not in any way equate to a letter expressing disappointment or disagreement.
Baran is the chief operating administrator of the district. It is his decision to make about how and where his employees work. It is his job to figure out if he has enough money in the budget to pay all the positions we have. The information he uses to make that decision changes frequently, sometimes by the hour. The letter you are speaking of was signed by one person, the WAT rep/sec and was informing Baran (the boss) that they didn’t feel they were given enough notice/consideration in his decision as it regarded their members. Keep in mind here that I’m pretty sure the decision didn’t violate the teacher’s contract specifications or the letter would have been a GRIEVANCE!
So, what we have in the end is someone doing their job and operating within the purview of their responsibilities and a letter expressing disappointment in a decision that was made. No contract was violated, no lack of confidence was stated…so how do we get to the point that Rosendahl is somehow justified to make such a blatantly inaccurate statement?
Your apparent problem here is that you are trying to find a way, some explanation, that will let you still hold Rosendahl and his merry band of malcontents in high esteem.
The reason we are all supposed to use the dictionary is so we can all use words in the same manner and thus understand each other. Throwing out words that aren’t true and thus malign someone’s professional and personal reputation is irresponsible. Trying to find a way to justify such abominable behavior is to add to the original injury.
For Rosendahl to clarify such an untruthful statement by saying that the letter wasn’t really a letter of no confidence but you could tell by reading it that they really wanted it to be a letter of no confidence, they just didn’t say it was a letter of no confidence is a way of Rosendahl saying he don’t know what the hell he was talking about but he wants it to be the way he thinks it should be anyway. (By the way, I know that the WAT is completely capable of saying exactly what they mean to say in a letter.)
The people who have undertaken this attempt to recall our Board of Education care little for understanding process and have no motivation to honestly assess the facts of the matter. I cannot possibly ascertain their motivations. It doesn’t matter. What seals me to my position is that I have done my homework. I have done my research. I even paid attention in my civics class.
Everyone has the right to their own opinion and to speak freely. I would not deny anyone that. However, along with those freedoms comes the responsibility of those statements. If you lie to me, make absolutely transparent that you have a hidden agenda and make light of the structure that has so nobly protected and guided us all these years, then I am duty bound to judge you by those behaviors and opinions.
This blatant attempt to recall the Board of Education has no merit. Sometimes we have to understand that not everybody is up to the task of having a free and open discussion. Not everybody is capable of respecting that others are able have a dissenting opinion. But, most of us would not stoop to manipulation, deliberately confusing the voters or maliciously trampling people’s characters.
The 3 YEAR OLD letter does not seem to be much of an issue. Read today’s VILLAGER under Letters to the Editor: Both sides gave it their best shot and by my lights the Petitioners fell far short of the mark.
It becomes clear that Petitioners rely on and are focused on OLD NEWS - issues which are simply NOT current, which have been resolved, which were a factor years ago and (as was pointed out) during which time several current BOE members were NOT even on the BOE. They failed to make any valid and CURRENT complaints regarding the BOE (except the usual ultra-vague condemnations, which are so vague as to be meaningless).
Both sides did good work in those letters - most are well written and persuasive. Taken as a whole, however, it becomes clear that the Petitioners are merely creating a facade of old issues to hide their true agenda. My compliments to all of the letter writers for a high level of expression (rarely seen in the Villager).
Read the letters - Petitioners’ ultimate complaint seems to be that the BOE have failed to create a perfect society in which no one argues or disagrees and where inadequate funding is never a problem, only a challenge…
Newcomer,
It’s too bad you missed this morning’s broadcast, there was a lot of information there. …(see Kevin’s new article. Admin).
Becki,
This isn’t just a matter of me trying to view the petitioners as nice folks. I believe Mr. Cotou’s assessment that this has become the disaster it has because of a lack of communication. I believe that wholeheartedly, especially after seeing the video of Avis Spalding. I don’t know what went on before 2005 but I think this has all come to an even greater head now with this recall referendum because of 2005. Two sides drew battle lines and went to war. One side’s continued the fight ever since. The other side has been bemoaning the fact that they are constantly under attack. Not having lived here when it all went on originally, I think it would be irresponsible of me not to try to get a thorough understanding of it all. The root of it all could shed light on what this is really all about now.
Are the barrage of FOI’s designed to entrap the board, or, like what Mr. Powers said about this referendum, get their attention? Or both? Or is it possible that all of this is being done for reasons like what Avis Spalding discusses on her video? Is it possible this is all being done because a certain segment of residents (it’s not JUST Powers and Shutlz) feel disenfranchised because the last few years’ makeup of boards hasn’t returned to the original, cooperative, and volunteerism-based way of running K-8?
Then there’s the point that Tax raised a day or two ago. If the BOE has become such a target, can they be effective no matter who is on it? Would a “do-over” make things better, worse, or have no appreciable effect at all? It’s this last question that I’m stuck on the most. I don’t view my vote as a confidence/no-confidence in the BOE members as individuals, but as a vote for continuing on the same path or shaking things up and which would be better.
These are some of the questions I’m still struggling with.
And Kevin, it IS definitely too bad I missed the broadcast. I checked on the WINY web site but they don’t post the broadcasts so people can go back and replay them. It would be helpful for anyone who missed it if they did.
I think Newcomer is starting to “get it”. She says “…a different group of folks with a different philosophy sweeps into town…”. Bingo! That philosophy, of course, is that spending more will make everything better. You can hardly blame them. They come from communities where outrageous spending is accepted with a shrug. I had the same attitude when I came here 24 years ago. I thought the taxes were low, I was making good money and a $400 increase in taxes every year to support good schools was ok with me. That was until I met people here that took the time to figure out what really goes on where spending is concerned.
The division we have in Woodstock is a very complex issue. Bits and pieces that make up the motivations on each side polarize us until we’re so stuck in the mud we can’t move or agree on anything-so nothing gets done. One “piece”, for example, that really sticks in my craw comes from those who are only concerned with the image we project by spending less than most other towns in the state. They fear that their property values will suffer because Woodstock won’t look as uppity to outsiders as they want it to. It wasn’t long ago that the School Building Committee proposed an archway at the entrance to the elementary school that said “Welcome to Woodstock Elementary”. The cost, I believe, was $165,000. Thankfully, that proposal was quickly squashed but the point here is that we have people with that mentality. This contrasts sharply with the attitudes of people like Fran Stevens and Avis Spaulding whose only motivation, where the schools are concerned, is providing the opportunity for our kids to get a good education. I’m with them. Forget the archways and the jobs program. Let’s focus on educating kids.
Joe,
I couldn’t care less about how uppity Woodstock looks. I do care about educational outcomes.
I’ve never even seen such an arch proposed.
Thanks,
Kevin
This post represents my personal opinions and in no way should be considered an official act of the BOE or that I am speaking on behalf of the BOE in any way.
Newcomer,
I wrote WINY and they have a standing policy against releasing such recordings.
Thanks,
Kevin
This post represents my personal opinions and in no way should be considered an official act of the BOE or that I am speaking on behalf of the BOE in any way.
Newcomer,
I just wanted you to consider just one more thing. You wrote, “Then there’s the point that Tax raised a day or two ago. If the BOE has become such a target, can they be effective no matter who is on it? Would a “do-over” make things better, worse, or have no appreciable effect at all? It’s this last question that I’m stuck on the most.”
Think about the implications of this. This group has been effectively attacking a duly elected board because they disagree with the politics and the will of the electorate at the time we were seated. Do you really think it will solve anything by just rolling over and letting them have their way because they are stirring the pot as hard as they can? What type of precedent would that set? If I’m unhappy with the new board could I start harassing them until such a problem is made that the community should unseat them as well? By following that logic that’s all I should have to do. Not that I’m the type of person that would do that and I think that should weigh heavily on your decision on what type of people you want running this town.
Thanks,
Kevin
This post represents my personal opinions and in no way should be considered an official act of the BOE or that I am speaking on behalf of the BOE in any way.
Kevin,
Thanks for calling WINY and I’ll certainly consider carefully what you’ve just offered in your last post.
There have been questions in this thread about the teacher’s stance on this issue. I can tell you that every teacher I’m in contact with is completely against this petition. One hundred percent of teachers I’ve spoken to (over 20) is hoping the ‘NO’ votes prevail. In fact, many parents will be getting phone calls tonight from their kid’s homeroom teachers asking them to vote ‘no’ on the referendum. We can do this from our home on our own time legally, and many of us feel it important enough to do this.
Also, that letter is a thing of the past. The teachers enjoy a great relationship with Dr. Baran and the BOE. Please support them as we do.
Kevin, The proposed archway was probably before you moved here(I don’t remember what year it was but I do remember Gus Massiello being outraged because of it; he died in 2004.) and I’m glad you’re not one of those concerned, primarily, with image.
Thanks Joe. What is really frustrating is that after the last election I feel the board did change direction based on who was elected. That’s why all the major complaints the petitioners have are more than two years old. The election process worked and the voters got what they wanted. That’s democracy in action.
But it looks like that’s not good enough for a few of the people in town. They don’t want only representation, they don’t want to have a say in a diverse board. What they apparently want is a board that does what they desire with little or no deviation.
There have been plenty of decisions made by the board that were not what I wanted. But we agreed to disagree and I moved on. That’s how the process is supposed to work and what democracy is all about. If the voters don’t like the direction the board currently is on, a full three seats will be open in November and that will have a further significant impact on the direction of the board. What’s really ironic is the people who hold those three seats that will be up for grabs are the ones who were actually around when the majority of their complaints happened. That election would have happened had they done nothing.
Thanks,
Kevin
This post represents my personal opinions and in no way should be considered an official act of the BOE or that I am speaking on behalf of the BOE in any way.