Lucy,
A week ago Laurie Frost and I posted the following, but you haven’t posted a response:
Lucy, Would you be willing to tell us — preferably with some substance and detail — how the BOE has been involved in the development and submission of the SLC grant? What role have you played? What on-going discussion has there been? What impact have you had? And so forth. I confess, it’s a mystery and a concern to me, as well. Thanks.
Posted by: Laurie Frost at September 7, 2007 5:04 PM
————————-
To make the issue even simpler, Lucy, do you support the direction of high school reform outlined in the grant application?
If yes, say no more.
If no, go back and answer Laurie’s questions.
Posted by: Ed Blume at September 7, 2007 7:44 PM
Would you please answer, Lucy? It’s part of being responsive to the citizens you serve and accountable for what you do or don’t do when you hold a public office — concepts foreign to the MMSD BOE in the past and the present.
I and other board members have been involved in exchanges with members of administration and each other regarding the SLC proposal. I have several criticisms of the proposal and have outlined them to district staff. Laurie is aware of this because I shared my comments with her at the time that I made them and again off line after this exchange started.
As for responding to constituents, Ed, I respond to plenty of them. But when someone is as persistently nasty, abusive, and just plain off center, I prefer to save my time for interactions that are actually productive. There clearly is no way to have that happen with you.
Laurie asked for details, Lucy. Apprently, you didn’t provide them when you two met, because she’s asking again.
Would you please share your criticisms of the SLC grant with those of us on the blog and explain how your criticisms reshaped the grant application? After all, you hold a PUBLIC office.
You have SOME obligation to inform voters and taxpayers, instead of just keeping your opinions private among members of the school board club.
When Laurie and I asked you politely to explain what you did to influence the grant, you didn’t bother to answer, so being “persistently nasty, abusive, and just plain off center” got you to respond. (I’ve learned that board members simply ignore polite people.)
Apparently, you and the other board members have had no impact. The administration appears to be plunging ahead with its dumbing down of the high schools.
Funny, you didn’t call me names when I worked on your campaign, and my hopes for the MMSD haven’t changed one bit. Do you think calling me names invalidates my hopes? Attacking me personally is not the same as attacking my ideas.
It’s just that you, Lawrie, and Maya have just been such disappointments, being as weak vis-as-vis the administration as the cheerleaders you replaced.
Lucy, I’m sure you and other board members are giving input to administrators. I’m sure it’s good input, too. Working from the inside is sometimes a good thing, but the problem I have is the public doesn’t know whether and how your input is incorporated into the proposals. When one board member gives input, it doesn’t really represent the decision of the Board as a whole, and the administration can ignore it (heaven knows they ignore plenty of stuff the board actually does vote on). Wouldn’t it be better to have discussions on important decisions out in the open?
If I had been polite, I would have phrased what I said exactly as Donald said it. He’s dead on correct.
I agree with Donald (and I’m sure most folks do) that it’s important to have discussions about important decisions conducted “out in the open”.
However, I’m not sure an internet blog-and-response site is the best place or can even be considered to be “out in the open.” Board meetings, yes. Public forums, yes. Why? Read the above exchange- it says it all.
Having the board committee and full board meetings televised is helpful. Recordings of the meetings in the auditorium dropped off over the summer. Not as many people may watch, but the video record is helpful, especially if the public can access those taped meetings from the website. I hope the board continues this meeting practice.
Since Lucy doesn’t seem to be forthcoming about her role in shaping the MMSD’s grant and implementation of small learning communities, I’m more than willing to force her hand. I just sent her the following open records request.
“Clarence Sharrod advised me that school board members are custodians of their own records.
Consequently, this is an open records request under sec. 19.35 of the Wisconsin Statutes for all of your records relating to the MMSD’s small learning communities grant and the MMSD’s implementation of small learning communities in general.
As I hope that you know, Wisconsin statues define records rather broadly. It is my understanding
that the definition includes any hard copy documents, as well as any e-mail between you, staff, and other board members whether on your MMSD, personal, or work e-mail account and whether written or received on any of those accounts.
I look forward to your prompt response to this request.”
I just sent the following to Lucy:
“Would you please acknowledge receipt of the previous open records request and indicate when I can expect the requested records?
I would rather have the records than file a complaint with the DA.”