|
 |
||
|
PALs Update Following is a review of the Aug. 11 CUSD board meeting. Open comments: 1) Supt. Woodrow Carter discussed being a district that stops the slander and focuses on the students. He also explained that Trustee Bryson was stuck in an out-of-town conference and could not join by phone because it would violate the Brown Act (it wasn't planned in time). 2) A parent discussed that the district is keeping a database of parent volunteer fingerprinting based on their Social Security Numbers (SSN). He was concerned that a database at the district is a privacy issue that can lead to credit fraud (he referenced the students at Tesoro who hacked into the system). He asked that the district find another way of keeping track of parent volunteers (using the last four digits of SSN for example). I spoke with Julie Hatchel at the district. She explained that if you have your fingerprinting done at the Sheriff's Dept., they use your SSN. If you go to another Live Scan place, they only need your driver's license. The district will discuss Tuesday what other options they have and will have more information next week. Mrs. Hatchel assured me that they have the most secure computer system. 3) Three or four parents thanked Carter for doing a "wonderful job." Board Votes: #5 School start and dismissal times: Approved 6-0 #30 Employee Retirement/Employment: This item was discussed by Trustee Palazzo. She questioned why administrators who retired were hired back as consultants. It was explained by Sherine Smith and Supt. Carter that these people were hired back as consultants for principal coaching, modeled after a teacher training program called BTSA. They coach first- and second-year principals and meet one to two times a month with the new principals. It is paid for by BTSA and teacher block grant funds (categorical/limited funds). The consultants get paid $40 an hour, not to exceed 100 hours. (I am not sure what the difference is between a mentor program for one- and two-year principals and their roles as assistant principals prior to becoming a principal. If a PALs member knows the difference, please let me know and I will be happy to pass it along to the rest of PALs.) This item was approved 6-0. #31 SJHHS Pipeline Risk Analysis: This was moved to the next Facilities Meeting. to occur before Aug. 25 (they will post when it will take place). The board is still concerned with the risk potential to students. #32 Busing Negative Declaration: Supt. Carter explained it was the only choice the district was left with and will have to cut something else if busing is brought back. Parents spoke about the hardship they will incur if busing is cut. A mom stated that busing is not a luxury. One dad from San Clemente also wondered where high school students will go after school if not picked up or on a bus. He said it opens students to more danger. He suggested cutting funding elsewhere to pay for buses, raise prices of busing, and/or coordinate with public transportation. City reps from MV and RSM spoke against the negative declaration stating that the traffic study is insufficient and not CEQA compliant. BOARD RESPONSE: Trustee Darnold suggested that principals at each school have a plan in place for next year to assist parents. Stiff said that there is no law that requires home-to-school transportation. Christensen stated, "We cut this because we wanted to keep teachers." Bob with Ultra Systems (the consulting company hired by CUSD – check out the agenda to see how much the district has paid them) explained the Ushering Program they came up with. Teachers may get an extra duty with this program to usher students in/out of their cars. Older students at the high schools can volunteer for this program. Palazzo questioned the liability issues with the Ushering Program. She also asked Vicki Soderburg (teacher's union president) if she had heard of this program and if the teachers were aware of it. Soderburg's answer was, "I am not prepared to speak on it tonight." Maddox thinks all options have not been fully exhausted and wants staff to craft a solution by Aug. 25 (next board meeting.). The item was tabled until the next board meeting with a vote of 6-0. On another note, the board meeting was definitely filled with people in the audience who had strong opinions. Some people felt it was okay to shout their opinions during the board meeting. It was quite disturbing for the rest of the audience who wanted to listen and made them feel very uncomfortable. Believe me, I know the level of frustration that can be felt, but shouting at elected officials during a meeting is inappropriate. I'm sure it wasn't PALs members doing the shouting despite a wide variety of opinions among PALs. Please feel free to spread the news that anybody and everybody is allowed to speak at board meetings. Speaking is not easy, but it is a great way to have the audience and board's full attention when informing them of your opinion. Last month, the board recently changed the rules so that you don't have to say or write down where you live and what school your children attend. People should know they are always allowed to voice their concerns in a respectful way at the board meetings. The only thing to remember is that they might limit the standard speaking time from three minutes, depending on the number of speakers. I hope you are enjoying the last weeks of summer. The next board meeting in Aug. 25 at 7 p.m.. Following are articles to read. www.parentsadvocateleague.org Busing Cutbacks Tabled By Capo School Board |
||