Steering the DWMP
Submitted by schoolboardblog... on September 3, 2008 - 1:47pm
Sometimes a motion is so complicated, or contains so many components, that when a board member votes "no", the rationale for that vote is not entirely obvious. So I thought it might be useful to explain why I voted against the motion at the August 25th meeting that established the make-up of the steering committee for the District Wide Master Plan.
Most of the proposed adjustments to the steering committee list passed unanimously, but there were a couple of exceptions. I thought it was a mistake to eliminate the seats for the three building principal representatives (one from each level: elementary, middle school, and high school). In my view, the experience of principals is unique, in that they understand building issues - including curriculum, staffing and space allocation - from the broader, building-wide perspective; a point-of-view you're not likely to get from anyone else. Principals also receive, as part of their job, a significant amount of community input - they hear both sides of practically everything.
I also think there is value in having a representative from the law enforcement community at the table. Their specialized understanding of safety and security issues would, I believe, greatly inform the community's conversation.
Those two issues were the basis of my "no" vote.
Most of the proposed adjustments to the steering committee list passed unanimously, but there were a couple of exceptions. I thought it was a mistake to eliminate the seats for the three building principal representatives (one from each level: elementary, middle school, and high school). In my view, the experience of principals is unique, in that they understand building issues - including curriculum, staffing and space allocation - from the broader, building-wide perspective; a point-of-view you're not likely to get from anyone else. Principals also receive, as part of their job, a significant amount of community input - they hear both sides of practically everything.
I also think there is value in having a representative from the law enforcement community at the table. Their specialized understanding of safety and security issues would, I believe, greatly inform the community's conversation.
Those two issues were the basis of my "no" vote.
»
- schoolboardblogger hutch153's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Proof is in the pudding
I was surprised to find that Hutch was almost starting to make sense at the recent board meetings. Then this. He recently hadn't seemed to be voting along the old versus new board lines and seemed to be interested in working with the new board members. Did Lou Evans vote first on the NO vote for the DWMP committee? If so, my guess is that Hutch was quickly reminded by that no vote to get back in step with the old board members and that is why he voted no on the issue he describes above. It's okay Dave. You really don't have to vote with them if you don't want to. Watch the new board members for how it's done. They think independently and their votes represent their independent and sometimes different viewpoints.
The lame and soon to go out of business CDT missed the point when they said the board was micromanaging the District in this planning process. I think it's good for the taxpayers to see the board being meticulous in this process. How soon the CDT editor forgets the $5 million debacle in which there was no planning - only more and more square feet and design being driven by the architect who made $5 million on a building that couldn't be built. I guess all of our questions about kickbacks and board members are finally answered. That link has all been proven now as we find out that Wienie-gate and the stupid concession stand that is poorly located, doesn't work for the booster needs and bears the name of Dr. Queeney was all a part of the grand plan for the renovation, south side athletic facilities and a naming opportunity for Dr. Queeney. I'll bet Kimball made some promises. Some day, I'll bet we find out that among those anonymous donors for the Queeney crapper was L. Robert Kimball. Is cutting design fees in HALF (from $59,000 to $28,000 for a cinder block building) considered an IN KIND donation for that project? How is that item listed in the accounting books? Who else was on that list of donors that Dr. Best assured the public that all were in support of the naming? Oh that's right, only Best and Queeney get to know.
I would have hoped that Dave learned his lesson about consultants leading projects the way they did with the lost $5 million. I would have hoped he would have aligned himself with the new board as they take the lead in directing the consultant instead of having the consultant direct them.
Hey Dave - what's up with Donna Queeney and all the absences? Aside from leaving the meetings she does attend to run out to give Dena Appalling press ready quotes before she leaves to write her impressive news stories, Donna's been AWOL a lot lately. She didn't attend the session on sustainability. She didn't attend the prep session with DeJong. She missed the last regular board meeting which included that vote on the DWMP steering committee. Is she ill or just pissed that the community is forward despite her? She could take a lesson from Obama who generally votes PRESENT rather than take a stand.
It seems to me that the new board has compromised on the open and oozing sores left by the old board; the $250,000 crapper, the naming of that same $250,000 unheated crapper which Best allowed to go through despite district policy, the auditorium upgrades that came in double the estimates, etc. Queeney's compromise has been to not show for meetings.
Does anyone know the date for the primary election next May?
Donna Queeney's Message To The State College Community
Her actions speak volumes. She is basically tell us all
We can only hope
That Dr. Queeney's absenteeism is a sign that she is not intending to run for re-election for school board. I strongly urge her to save herself the embarrassment and the wasting of her own or other Borough resident's contributions on a re-election push. The clips of Donna rolling her eyes over the years when other are speaking at board meetings will make it to YouTube in less time than you can say "It's a done deal."
I'm taking my hot dog stand and going home.