This is a
community commentary submitted by Calvin Jarvis responding to Ruth Sample as well as the David Taylor lawsuit.
Thank you, Tom Seiler of Dover, for restoring my faith in the public at large, by your poignant and thought-provoking commentary, "About the Oyster River petition -" It reminded me of this fundamental truth: in America, civil liberties do not merely extend to the self-righteous, assimilated puritans of our society.
I've been accused of "harmful speculation" in my recent commentary. I would counter that Mr. Rubine and his wife have tried to stir up a tornado because of a closed Twitter account. What should be painted to look like a few stormy clouds over a field of "pretty tulips," they are painting to look like, "The Scream."
Ruth Sample claims she has "no opinion" of Howard Colter's performance. Then, two sentences later, she does have an opinion about the buyout of his contract. Aren't the two inexorably linked? What reason would the School Board have for parting company with the Superintendent of Schools, unless they believed it was in the best interests of the district? Let us not forget, the School Board is the legitimate governing authority. They were elected to make those decisions.
The buy-out of Colter's contract was a personnel matter, which I believe is confidential under the law, and which Colter himself said was confidential by agreement. Now we have David Taylor suing the School Board because he has a "right to know." He wants his court costs paid by the taxpayers, and a judge to say discussion between the Board members, about Colter, should have been conducted in public. Why? So the Board could listen to the one-sided clapping, and muted jeers from FORE members besieging them every meeting? The tactics of intimidation and harassment have already gone past the point of reason, from a group which has declared they engage in "civil discourse."
I'm a U.S. Navy, submarine service veteran. I served when the Cold War wasn't so cold for Submarine Squadron 8. I know what courage looks like. I've had the honor of serving in support of SEAL teams, deployed from the USS Birmingham, (SSN-695). I know from firsthand experience SEAL members are amazing, courageous individuals. They possess verve and guts the rest of us only see in the movies. They are our real-life "Captain Americas" in my book.
We all suffered a terrible loss in Afghanistan this week, of brave American warriors. They are heroes, who made the ultimate sacrifice fighting to protect us, so we'll never have to endure another 9-11. We owe our personal freedoms and liberties, indeed, our democratic way of life, to the patriotic men and women of all branches of the military, who've given their lives in the service of this country.
What dishonors our fallen more, than disrespecting our democratic principles? Consider the actions of FORE and their clan. It made me sick to view David Taylor at the April 16 School Board meeting. He leaped to his feet, as an imposing mob was railing against the School Board. He singled out a board member, Megan Turnbull, and squealed, "Just have the courage to raise your hand and call for a re-vote, and you can fix this!" (This was regarding the 4-3 vote against Justin Campbell, as ORHS principal). David Taylor doesn't know the meaning of the word "courage."
He needs to understand, it doesn't take courage to cow-tow to a bunch of intimidators; it takes courage to stand up to them! This School Board has demonstrated courage time and again in the face of obstinate wrangling and rancor from this self-righteous group.
David Taylor is persisting with his crusade against the School Board because of his own self-serving agenda. He is afraid that if this School Board is successful, it will reflect poorly on his years as a board member. Not because of him, and in fact, despite him, and only through the work of a few diligent individuals, were serious problems with the School Board revealed. District voters became aware that the books were a mess, the budget was bloated, policies weren't being followed, and the fox was minding the hen house. Taylor was ousted from the board after being soundly beaten at the polls during the 2010 election. He only garnered 605 votes, while his opponents received 1,249 and 1,064 votes, respectively, as newcomers.
Despite the obstacles continually cast in front of this School Board, they have succeeded, and made progress in only a few short months. They have filled key positions for a new administration to steer this district back on course. This includes an interim high school principal, and an interim superintendent. FORE can be expected to continue lobbing proverbial "mortars" at them to try to derail their efforts. This School Board has impressed me with their resilience, and fortitude, despite the stress and pressure applied by their detractors. By keeping the faith, and staying patient, we should soon realize the benefits of their efforts. Maybe we can actually start devoting time during School Board meetings to educational issues in this district.
Thank you Mr. Jarvis for documenting the history and context around David Taylor's lawsuit. You are correct when you state this act is cowardly. For those people who do not remember. He is acting like a child who isn't getting his way and is lashing out at our expense. Instead of being civil and trying to better the education in the district...he goes and files this frivolous lawsuit just because he can. What a petty act!!! I hope the community sees this for what it is - a former board member who is upset that all his cronies were ousted and wants revenge.
ReplyDeleteThe reasoning behind Mr. Jarvis' commentary escapes me. He speaks of dishonoring our nation's fallen and that Mr. Taylor, in seeking to shed light on the actions of this far from transparent school board, seems to be disrespecting our nation's principles. I strongly disagree. There is something called the Right to Know law, otherwise referred to as a "sunshine law", as it seeks to shed light on the workings of our government. These are laws, Mr. Jarvis and Mr. Firmonti. They apply to all elected officials - shockingly even your friends. When some people violate the rtk laws the only recourse allowed is for individual citizens to file petitions for injunctive relief. To call such an act cowardly or self serving is a political statement.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, rtk requests have been filed against our school district for a very long time. Certainly the administrators of this blog have filed them, sitting school board members have filed them - some taking a great deal of staff time to comply with. However, now that sitting school board members are the recipients of these rtk requests - and apparently the board chair is refusing to comply - some of our far right members of the community are coming out to yell, "no fair"!
Mr. Jarvis may hold out hope for this board to talk about educational issues that will have impact on our kids, but I'm not holding my breath. These board members have no larger vision. They love to focus on detail and while I was hoping the new superintendent would steer them in the right direction, it seems as if the big subject for the next meeting is The Pledge of Allegiance. I want to either cry or laugh.
I also would like to see this blog and the people who run it stop bullying members of the public and other with whom they disagree. I feel that I need to respond because bullying should not go un checked, however, I also don't want to write on a blog that celebrates meanness, and encourages incivility. Let's see if this comment will make it by the blog administrators .
Mr. Dennis,
ReplyDeleteI fail to see how this blog is bullying those that speak out. If you see my other comments on here, I welcome anyone to write and post articles here. I make no agenda-driven restrictions in the interest of controlling communication. In fact, if you look at the posting history - most if not all letters to the editor, community commentary, and newspaper articles are published here.
I agree that responding with Right to Know requests can be burdensome and seem trivial in some respects. However, the difference with the past and now is that Mr. Taylor "went to the mattresses" and didn't seek out Mr. Brackett or the Superintendent one on one and try to gain a further level of understanding.
I have an example.
A good friend of mine also filed a right to know with the district and it was not replied or complied with in a timely manner. It was actually a longer timeframe he waited before taking the next step. Instead of going to the courts, he simply asked for a one on one meeting, got it, and then received the needed information. It was handled without a blog post, newspaper article, and was done so respectfully and without the negativity surrounding what Mr. Taylor did.
What result does Mr. Taylor see at the end of this process? Is it good for the kids? How does it help THEM further THEIR education? How will the reputation on the district be affected? How much time is being wasted on this lawsuit that could be repurposed into finalizing the strategic plan and actually getting back to discussing education. What I have seen when I attend board meetings, workshops, and other open meetings are vocal special interest groups continuing to berate, distract, and get in the way of real, positive progress. Imagine being on the board and trying to go to a half day retreat with your new superintendent and there are people in the gallery typing EVERY word you say and documenting on EVERY body movement and facial expression. Not only that but whispering and making "cues" to some board members on top of it all. I witnessed that and it serves little purpose but to divide and distract a board trying desperately to find some footing and direction.
A.E. Dennis --
ReplyDeleteDon't laugh or cry yet! You may be unaware that the district publishes an agenda of what will be discussed during each upcoming school board meeting. While I don't see anything related to the Pledge of Allegience on the agenda for the next meeting [1], there are lots of other important items being addressed -- perhaps you will find something else to elicit conflicting emotions.
All joking aside, I don't think you are being fair to the new superintendent with your impatience. The board and the superintendent have conducted exactly one workshop meeting together. In the short time since his arrival, I've seen a great deal of progress by Superintendent Levesque and the board correcting and addressing a multitude of small, but important details that have built up over the years. These policy and fiscal details may be boring to you, but they serve to establish and maintain a solid foundation for larger endevors to build upon. In my opinion, having well written, thoughtful, and current policy in place is a crucial part of reducing the administrative "busywork" and distractions placed on teachers which frees them to focus on teaching. At the end of the day, good education is what it's all about.
[1] http://oysterrivercommunity.blogspot.com/2011/08/school-board-regular-meeting-on-august.html
Whoops! My apologies to A.E. Dennis -- I was wrong. The board _is_ discussing the Pledge of Allegiance.
ReplyDeleteAgenda item VIII-A is a first read of a number of policy revisions including policy BEDB (Agenda Preparation and Format) to include the Pledge of Allegiance following Call to Order. See page 42 of the 8/17 agenda supporting material.