Update 2: So I have seen a message from President Liza Rankin on why she, Director Evan Briggs, and Director Michelle Sarju backed out of this meeting. In a nutshell: - She says there was no organization to the meeting which is just not true. They had a moderator lined up and naturally the board members could have set parameters for what to discuss, length of meeting, etc. All that was fleshed out. - She also claimed that if the meeting was PTA sponsored, they needed to have liability insurance to use the school space. Hello? PTAs use school space all the time and know they have to have this insurance. - She seems to be worried about the Open Public Meetings law. Look, if she has a meeting in a school building on a non-personnel topic, it should be an open meeting. It appears that Rankin is trying, over and over, to narrow the window of access that parents have to Board members. She even says in her message - "...with decisions made in public." Hmmm - She also says that th
Comments
One, the communications topic. "District communications have been timely, substantive, concise, and well formatted." None of those things as applied to district communications have been done well. I'd give communications a C-/D+.
And no mention of the Board's unhappiness with how Raj carried out Phase II (just that staff had to work a lot on C&C)? They were very unhappy with the way he did not follow their directions on Phase II. It's been cited as the straw that broke the camel's back and yet nothing.
Did this come out of committee? Which committee?
In what context/where was it on the
District Communication piece would suggest that Boardmembers still do not get it and frankly at this point it has to be a conscious choice not to get it and to face-save.
Is there now a new Public Affairs person after the last gentlemen left and the other person was on leave - did not see it posted on vacancies a while back?
Perhaps a performance audit by Auditor Sontag is in order on the issue specifically of communication.
Does anyone know how to request such an audit?
Is the 2006-07 workplan in fact on the web now? Looked a while back and did not find it - is there a reason that committee mtg. minutes are not on the web? Frankly, find the web and public disclosure elements to be insulting at best and illegal at worst.
Might the new executive committee of Chow, Flynn and Stewart focus on these issues? One can hope.
The language in that evaluation really doesn't make any sense.