Let me remind the public that part of the Superintendent's duties is to respectfully and dutifully abide by the NH Right to Know laws. Regardless of who said the "monkey" comment, this situation and paraphrasing should have been much more professional.
Also, the public is not a group that is simply tolerated at best but we in the community need to be shown respect and have cooperation within the constraints of the law.
Wow...this is wrong on so many levels, I don't know where to begin!
ReplyDeleteSince I saw this exchange on DCAT I've wrestled with any number of reactions...I've been angry, I've been disappointed, saddened.
I mean, I am likely one of the "monkeys" Mr. Colter is talking about. I make Right-To-Know requests fairly frequently. Now I know why their reaction down at the District's office has, at times, been less than joyous!
Here's the point...though I don't always succeed, I strive to treat those with whom I interact with an attitude of courtesy, professionalism, and respect. I'd expect the same of our school officials.
Mr. Colter was speaking about a member of the public here, someone exercising his (or her) right under state law to understand what the District is doing in our name and with our dollars. For this, s/he gets called a monkey, in public?
For crying out loud, we're talking about a task he is obligated to do as part of his job! And he's referring to the people who pay his salary!
Mr. Colter's flip comment speaks volumes about his own attitude (and that of his subordinates) toward the citizens of Durham, Lee and Madbury. If he'll call us "monkeys" in public, what is he saying behind closed doors?
What a misrepresentation!! The Superintendent never referred to anyone being a monkey and any reasonable person knows that. Shame on whoever posted this along with the implication. Getting a monkey off one's back is a metaphor for taking care of a task that needs to be done; a task that is onerous. It was a comment made by the administrative assistant to the superintendent; stated clearly in the tape.
ReplyDeleteShame on this site for allowing misrepresentations borbering on lies!!
How can a VIDEO be a misrepresentation. Thank you for posting the video. We can all see for ourselves and draw our own conclusions. You can claim that it is a metaphor for a task all you want but the bitterness of the Superintendent in talking about that/those member(s) of the public leads me to draw a different conclusion.
ReplyDeleteI did watch this entire meeting and was very disappointed that AGAIN, the Superintendent and some members of the Board would not even entertain the thought of making public information more accessible through the ORCSD website. Even Drew Christie (a wonderful addition to this group--I wish he would run) said that in this day and age of technology, these are things we are going to have to start thinking about, even if we do not decide to be a leader in this area.
Agree or disagree, it is important to have these kinds of conversations. I say, if you have nothing to hide, then make it easy for people to see. The truth will set you free.
These are PUBLIC schools and we have a legal right to this information.
--Engage Every Citizen!
This site serves to inform the public about what is happening in the district. We post both good and bad. Please take a look at all previous posts. We commend arts and languages, congratulate teachers, and yes, point out where we think there is room for improvement.
ReplyDeleteRegardless of who said the monkey comment, Mr. Colter's tone was inappropriate and the comment never needed to be said in public. Mr. Bebbington's question is valid. If the administration is so cavalier as to say comments like this in public, what are they saying behind closed doors.
I have heard from people in "the know" and speaking under anonymity that the SAU office is micro managed, there is no consistency and no accountability. I have heard a school board member say to another that they will never trust them and vow to continually fight against them.
It comes down to a cluster**** that is impairing progress in the district. The board cannot make or want to make the administration accountable for their actions. The administration takes actions that are in direct violation of protocol and do not trust and tolerate at best the school board.
Just watch any recent school board meeting...what do they actually get done? Not much! They should be setting vision and direction. Instead, they are swamped in discussions of granular details that should be delegated to employees in the district.
Just my 2 cents!
Who or what do I think of when I am reading postings at this site?:
ReplyDeleteRush Limbaugh
Fox News
Glenn Beck
The tea party(those gun toting types)
Sarah Palin(heavy on rhetoric;light on substance & facts)
THe need to twist what is factual is so blatantly obvious that even the sincere, honest postings get mixed in with the trash. I am totally done with this site and hope the ORCSD community can find a forum for conversation and the integrating of ideas. It is obvious that it won't happen here amongst a core of people who are close minded with predisposed dispositions that don't include tolerance for differences.
Such an unhappy bunch you all seem....
If you would like to be an author, just contact us. We welcome all viewpoints. Stating an opinion with the ability to comment for and against allows all stakeholders to offer their opinions. So if people want to write topics then contact us so we can allow that. The "core" folks you tout are not opposed to hearing other viewpoints and would welcome your readership and articles. It's the only way to make this blog better!
ReplyDeleteCreating words? (LOL) The Superintentent was speaking negatively about members of public. The metaphor used speaks about members of the public being a burden and that particular metaphor is very loaded. Howard simply should have used better judgement!
ReplyDeleteIf name calling is the best you can do to try to discredit important dialogue, then so sad for you.
Name calling? you have got to be kidding me!
ReplyDeleteWhen one person, or a group of people consistently ask a single person for gobs and gobs of information - almost all of which needs lengthy amounts of researching -- yeah, I would agree that it is a lot of work. I agree with you that it is all public information and that I have no problem with. But that secretary has a job to do. She is not the public's secretary -- able to drop everything on a whim to satisfy every Joe, Tom Dick and Harry at a moment's notice. For Christ's sake, he used a metaphor plain and simple and that is all. I know Mr. Colter and he would NEVER do what you accuse him of doing.
I agree with the above -- shame on you all for this sladerous accusation.
I thought this blog was full of misinformation, but this has taken that perception one step beyond the pale.
ReplyDeleteMost of the people in our community are well aware that “monkey on your back” is an idiom, and is not meant to be taken literally. I am sure that Durham Parent and Mr. Bebbington have heard the phrase before. It is clear Mr. Colter was NOT literally calling taxpayers, “monkeys”. He was, however, alluding to the fact that repeated Right to Know requests require man/woman power if they are to be answered. Those responsibilities are hanging over the heads of the support and professional staff that have to respond to them in addition to all the other things they are expected to do during a work week.
While we all have a legal “Right to Know” public information, what are the costs of demanding it? What work is not getting done so these individuals get the information they “need” in order to be able to prove that someone isn’t doing what they should be (according to the person requesting the information and his/her friends)?
Let’s face it, these people weren’t hired to gather and copy records, (sometimes totaling dozens or hundreds of pages). They were hired to deal with personnel issues or special education or curriculum or something else pertaining to EDUCATION. Instead, gathering information for requests that result in no change, no proof of malfeasance and no improvement in EDUCATION ends up dominating their work day. If that doesn’t characterize a “monkey on your back”, I don’t know what does.
If Howard Colter was a better speaker, this blog wouldn’t even exist, but there is no way he was “calling the public monkeys”. Why don’t you consider doing some volunteer work in your local school instead of spending your time chasing moonbeams?
I volunteer and I chase moonbeams. Do YOU actually watch these meetings? If so, you must be asleep. If the SD was more responsive to the public NONE of this would be happening and we would not need this conversation. This is a product of their own negligence. The "monkey on the back" of the Distrcit is a product of their own doing. They will be chasing their tails until they step up and make some changes.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to take a moment to respond to some of the criticism here, most especially that leveled the self-appointed coronator of nuts.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, you are entitled to have any opinion you want, even if you are wrong. By the same token, so am I. Which also means you don't get to tell me what I am allowed to find offensive.
And you ARE wrong, by the way. Because if you had spent as much time interacting with the staff of the ORCSD as I have, you would know that not everyone treats members of the public with an attitude of courtesy and respect. But that point is wasted on many of you, because you don't either.
And if you had done something more productive than watching Sponge Bob reruns last Wednesday evening, you could have gone to the School Board meeting and seen me making a public comment, a comment where I asked all parties, be they elected, appointed, or just citizens, to try to put aside the nasty name-calling so that we can have a honest debate about the issues. But again, you are not interested in debating issues, because calling people "stupid" is so much more fun for you (and doing so anonymously is so brave and courageous, I might add).
The point I tried to make is that the rhetoric is getting in the way of the way of solving the very real problems facing our District. Enrollment is dropping, costs are rising--and the way to move forward on these issues is NOT to throw around terms like "monkey", "nuts" and "stupid".
In a way, I should thank you. You've volunteered to be exhibit A for the point I made. But I don't imagine that was your intent; it's highly unlikely you possess the maturity, regardless of your age, to have achieved that kind of self-awareness. And given your vocabulary, it's likely that your lips are moving as you read this.
This blog has long been a forum for people to debate and exchange ideas. Since you don't have any to offer, the only one wasting time here is you.
Mr. Bebbington just dropped the gauntlet. Let me be quote frank. I don't think that the author here is accusing the superintendent of calling the public monkeys. I think it serves as an example to make a more higher point of the treatment of the public and its concerns.
ReplyDeleteLook at this board....they are not forward thinking and looking for change. Take a look at recent history...
declined to speak to Newmarket,
declined to acknowledge any respect or cooperation with Durham,
resisted the grade point change,
resisted a strategic plan prior to last election,
declined full day kindergarten,
declined a budget committee.
The list goes on and on. These are just fact but what do I know???
- Assistant to the king of the nut farm!
Where is the change. One Durham school board rep ran under fiscal conservativeness but where is it? Shooting down a box of paper here or there? Lets get the change going or get people in who will force it!
ReplyDeletedeclined to speak to Newmarket - Thank GOD they didn't. Adding them would cost a fortune.
ReplyDeletedeclined to acknowledge any respect or cooperation with Durham - Your opinion. Just wait. Mr. Clark's wacky proposal didn't seem to have all that much support from the Town Council.
resisted the grade point change -- HUH?? Where the hell did this come from? Did you actually know that that is a school-level change that cannot happen overnight? It came but with good discussion and sound research.
resisted a strategic plan prior to last election - Talk to people on this committee. It is full of residents who love to hear them talk. Unfortunately, they don't have a clue about education in the real world.
declined full day kindergarten - Too expensive. All everyone complains about is their taxes. You know that we would have to hire at least 4 new teachers for this initiative.
declined a budget committee - Thank God!
Fortunately, you don't know jack.
Either do you, doofus. Clark's proposal passed. Now watch the school admins run like roaches when you turn on the light!
ReplyDeleteLook...on the grade point thing, he DID resist the change...saying it would dumb down our schools....how do you think as a teacher I felt about that? Like crap...
ReplyDeleteFull day kindergarten - could be done without taxpayer increases if they just eliminated operational waste.
It would be nice to actually have some real discussions here but the people who want status-quo are not open to discussion. Having a discussion involves ALL stakeholders--students, teachers, administrators, Board members and the public. This is a public school and we all have a stake (whether you have kids in the system or not).
ReplyDeleteChallenging the Board or the administration in a respectful manner is a good thing--the public should be engaged and the public administrators and our elected officials should be kept on their toes. Complacency breeds problems.
Our Board should want the public to feel respectfully engaged--this should be a goal not a problem. Instead of making people feel shut out, bring them in and use the talents that many people in this highly educated community have to offer.
I think that the strategic planning committees are a great first step and it would be nice to see more community people working for the good of the schools and our kids.
I know I want the best for my little ones and that is why I stay involved. You may not agree with me, and that is ok, but at least I am involved and pushing for policies and principles that I think will have the best results for my kids. I do not just complain, I participate in the change I want to see. We all have different ideas and they should be respected and debated.
You have a great opportunity to make change in this district by voting--get out there on March 9th! Research your candidates and decide who best represents your point of view--this is the democratic process at work.
When do we put away the pitchforks?
ReplyDeleteWhen are we satisfied?
According to the goals of this site - 3 board members you supported last year were elected.
According to what this site's author's asked for - a district Strategic Plan has been started and has made progress.
The posters of this site asked for a budget that is easier to read - like the Durham budget. At the last meeting Blaine not only reviewed it, he commented that he liked parts of it and would incorporate this into the next budget cycle.
That by my count is just 3 significant wins - yet you don't celebrate them?
What this district needs, administration, school board and staff is breathing room to execute.
This post is selfish and completely unnecessary. I ask, would you be able to work under the intense scrutiny levied upon you? Would you be able to execute under constant criticism from the public and be perfect in every word you speak?
The comment on tape can be taken a number of ways, and it speaks volumes of how you are interpreting it.
I am not asking you to hold your tongue, but am asking you to be a bit smarter about how you wield it. If we are to be successful, to move forward and deliver - we need your help too.
Thank you.
BTW - Where's the post thanking the Central Office Administrators for taking a 0% increase this year?
Why all the hate?
I know they don't teach this in church - especially at Saint Mary's.
"What this district needs, administration, school board and staff is breathing room to execute."
ReplyDeleteNo, what this district needs is constant vigilance, and criticism where necessary. That's the proper role of the citizenry vis a vis public officials. Otherwise, they'll never be forced to make improvements.
If you're satisfied with the status quo, go ahead and celebrate. The rest of us will continue to seek change until things improve. There is no mythical end-point where we all decide things are "good enough".
And what all that has to do with "hate" I just don't know. More likely, you're just a shill for an administration unwilling/unable to change.
The "monkey" reference doesn't bother me. What bothers me is the patronizing attitude that Mr. Colter has toward the parents. Parents are not a nuisance, they are the reason Mr. Colter is employed (i.e., no parents = no students). If parents are too much trouble, then maybe it is time for him to retire or find a different job. He pays lip service to parents, but each time I've spoken with him, I've known that in his mind he had already dismissed me. Being a good communicator should be a minimum prerequisite for the job of superintendent. Who on earth was on his hiring committee? Remember Tom Carol? It was always crystal clear that the kids were first in his mind, but he also managed to make the parents & teachers feel supported. There was the feeling that we all were on the same team. Mr. Colter gives off vibes of a person trying to hide something.
ReplyDeleteAnd in reference to the earlier entry... Did Mr. Colter & Blaine Cox get a 0% increase this year? I thought they had negotiated a plum three year contract in Dec. 2008, which gives them larger raises than the teachers for each of the three years. By the way, Blaine had never had a multiple year contract before that date. And Howard had not even had his performance review before his contract was rushed through. It was very questionable at the time. JoAnn Portalupi signed the contracts before the Board had even voted for the contracts. This was an attempt to give Mr. Colter security before the election. The way it was done seemed very sneaky.
Yes! Good post! Last year around this time, the superintendent and business administrator did get renewed contracts and it was done without following board policy. The renewal date was AFTER the 2009 elections but the contracts were renewed earlier with an explanation of keeping Mr. Colter because other districts might steal him away!
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing this went unnoticed or no one cared. I think it was because everyone wanted a strategic plan more than take up this charge. It is irrelevant now but important to understand how we came to where we are today!
Thanks for the reminder!
Lots of us cared, but it was hard to do anything when the only ones you could complain to were the ones making those decisions. It was totally unethical and isn't signing a contract before a vote, illegal or at least against the rules?? It just demonstrates the shenanigans that have been going on and it is probably just the tip of the iceberg.
ReplyDeleteIn any negotiations with employees, both sides must come to a tenative agreement -- and sign it. That does not mean that you are signing it off to put into practice. It only means that it is a tentative agreement (key word here is "tentative"). It doesn't meant that Joann Portalupi signed it to be put into action. Once both sides came to an agreement, it went to the entire board and they approved it.
ReplyDeleteToo bad the above posters are looking and probing for perceived misdeeds. Nothing in this was illegal or unethical. The only thing that was "odd" was that it was for more than one year - something that has never been done in our district.