A letter to the editor
Dear Editor: I’m voting for Arlene Silveira for Madison School Board because she has, with words and actions, shown leadership about school resource policy. From the last year’s dialogue I’ve concluded that candidates need to be judged on how they respond to the complex issues. Does he or she problem-solve or position?
I think it’s useful when a candidate focuses on improving communications and helps devise ways to get wider circles involved in resource issues. If a candidate has actually organized people to address resource issues, then she has demonstrated credibility. Arlene has helped organize people toward solutions. I don’t think it is useful when candidates talk ambiguously about trust and perceptions without offering solutions.
I think it’s practical when, in response to state funding failures, a candidate supports interim solutions to minimize the damage. Arlene took a stand on the referendums. I think it’s disingenuous when candidates avoid taking such clear stands, preferring instead to criticize the real outcomes that result from those state failures.
I think it’s responsivewhen candidates offer interim solutions to resource issues so the community can re-evaluate as circumstances change. Arlene helped make those decisions. I think it’s “spin” when a candidate attempts to portray short-term solutions as ignoring planning just to make a political point (especially when long-term planning IS occurring).
I think it’s strategic when candidates talk about districtwide solutions that engage the support of a range of interests from real estate agents to homeowners, parents of students and teachers. As a businesswoman Arlene is credible across that spectrum. I think it erodes support for schools when candidates “work” narrow interests, promising narrow solutions.
Times are tough for our schools. Neocon policies at other levels of government are designed to reduce the expectations of publicly delivered education here and elsewhere. Candidates who resist that drift by bringing people to the process and seeking real solutions counter those damaging intentions.
Arlene has demonstrated a view that school resource policy is not just about her kids, their school or this or that program but is a matter that impacts shared expectations for our schools across the district.
Nick Berigan
Madison
Published: February 16, 2006
Copyright 2006 The Capital Times
4 Comments
Arlene Silveira may be very successful in the business world, but the reference to her advocacy re: the Leopold expansion is a rather weak argument to advance for voting for her. If she is so effective at organizing a community, one must ask generally why the referendum on Leopold failed, and more telling, why those residents most likely to gain from an expanded Leopold, Fitchburg voters, actually voted heavily against the referendum.
We need school board members who will build consensus across the community and do so in a way that invites broad debate and open participation, not just from the hand-selected few who agree closely with MTI and the adminstration.
What’s missing is trust in the process. To tout agreement with the position of the current board majority and administration, without deeper analysis, is not a strength in my book. I want someone who will be willing to dig for information, fight stonewalling, question assumptions and be willing to listen to viewpoints other than Rainwater and MTI’s Matthews.
The candidates that best fit that big bill are Maya Cole, Silveira’s opponent, and Lucy Mathiak. And as important as their individual contribution to the board, something more important will happen should Maya and Lucy win,: the majority on the board will shift. No longer would Carol Carstensen control (read: censor) the agenda or assign committee chairs to those who won’t upset the administration applecart. It’s a golden opportunity to restore faith in the process and most important, to improve the educational opportunities for all our children.
I could not agree more with Barbara. Arlene has been a strong advocate for our schools. She has shown leadership and demonstrated her determination to assure a quality education for all of our children. I actually want a leader who is successful in her field. She has the business and scientific mind that will make her an incredible leader on the school board. Arlene has the track record necessary for someone to run for school board. She is a strong leader who is needed in a time when schools are under attack. I want a leader who has the scientific background who can read the long-term projections and understand the achievement data, has a working knowledge of large budgets, and can assure that resources are allocated to best meet the needs of our children. I see people complaining about the lack of research based instruction, lack of communication, lack of engagement with the public, and lack of long-term planning. Arlene has the skills to address those concerns AND has a proven track record of advocacy for our children. That is why I will be there for her as she has been there for our community for so many years.
Troy Dassler
Nick’s comments really hit the mark.
Arlene Silveira really digs to learn as much as she can about hurdles we face as a school district, establishes strong ties with community and school leaders to build teams to solve problems, and (#1) she really cares for success of our district (this means she will hold people accountable). Her message is heard well beyond Leopold and Cherokee. She has a bundle of analytical skills and a sense of the politics. She’s ready for this job, and she’ll challenge everyone on the board to a higher standard of operation. Why? It’s because we’ll all need to be better to handle the challenges of the next couple of years.
The most important reason to vote for Arlene is not to somehow fix the board, but to help turn the message around that we’re all needed to keep our school district moving forward.
For those on the fence – just watch her in action. You’ll have plenty of opportunities to see her. She’s at most of the board meetings, attends forums, has made many ties with other community leaders, and she’s having fun doing it. Madison is small enough you can really get to know Arlene.
I’m very dissapointed with a strategy to vote someone in for the primary purpose of overturning a majority stance (I’m sure Arlene will not be a rubber-stamp, by the way). Voting against someone on the basis of a bitter soundbite is very short-sided because it can lead to other problems (like the Republican Revolution in Congress 1994, which was supposedly based on ethics and reform).
Two current board members most often in the minority are not all that stellar in their openness, engagement with the public, or community outreach, by the way. They are talented analytically, serve the community well by looking at things carefully, and ask good questions. However, their positions often are shaped with dissent, inaction, appeasement to their own supporters, and 90-degree turns. Carol Carstensen’s job is to lead the board, to keep the process moving, to seek some resolution on questions raised. It’s not all going to go smoothly when we face such big budget problems and when there is not consensus. You can watch Carol in action, too.
Trust is a two-way street. The board has to be able to trust us to get behind more than our own pet projects. The administration has to trust we’ll review data carefully, working to understand more of the complexities, as it more fully shares the internal workings of the administration. We need that trust and it can start when we vote for the best person for the job (without partisanship or ulterior motives) and continue to work with board and administration for better solutions.
The bottom line is what happens in the classrooms and broader school environment. I have a lot of confidence that Arlene will put her emphasis, as our teachers do, on learning and collaborative learning environments.
I want to put a stop to the false implication that:
“Fitchburg voters, actually voted heavily against the referendum”
The vote for Fitchburg and other wards can be found at:
http://www.co.dane.wi.us/coclerk/elect2005c.html
The total was actually split:
813 Yes
837 No
a difference of only 24.
Maybe, like the rest of us, they are frustrated with the legislative process for getting a new school, funding our programs, and lack of support from all BOE members.