It looks as if the naysayer’s were right. I think we wasted everyone’s time with mediation. What does listening mean to you? Does it mean just hearing what someone is saying? Or is consideration of what was said come into play? For me it is this: to take in what someone has said, consider it against my own point of view, perhaps use what was said to modify my point of view, perhaps not. But last night was an example of how it really works. It was stated that “we have to listen to what they have to say, but we don’t have to consider them or capitulate to them.” Gee, thanks. If you’re not going to consider others’ ideas, what is the point of my going to meetings? I also found it very telling that one board member stated that she had planned to be president and have another member to be VP, but “allowed” the current set up to try to compromise and give the appearance of harmony. So I guess we really do have one person running the show. At least that’s how it sounded to me. The selections were done behind closed doors and the rest of us were let in on it at the meeting.
I have said it to many in individual E-mails but I guess it’s time to say it here- You are complaining to the wrong person. You need to be E-mailing your concerns to the three board members that are running the board. They are the ones that can make changes happen. I can tell them how you feel ‘til I’m blue in the face. But as stated above, it falls on deaf ears. Don’t get me wrong, I still want your input on issues, but when you write to complain to me about the very same things I’m complaining about, it’s not productive. If you don’t hear back via Email, call them. They are who is directing how your tax dollars are spent. Not me.
I know there are some of you chomping at the bit about Wednesday’s levy vote. I would like to clarify a few things. First of all we voted to send the language to the County Fiscal Officer, not to put it on the ballot. I do still have questions and concerns before the ballot vote. But I do think Mrs. Gunter made a valid point. She said that in her mind putting this issue on the ballot is giving the voters a chance to evaluate the board. I’ll take it one farther and say it’s a chance to let the voters evaluate this district. Some will say that by putting it on the ballot it’s an endorsement of it. I disagree. I think there are blind followers on both sides of every issue. If people think this district needs and deserves this money it will pass. If people are fed up, it will fail. Either way I do know this. The state auditor said our staying out of fiscal watch depends on renewal levies. Having a school system in fiscal watch isn't good for your property values. And if you want your community to be desireable to families looking to buy a house, fiscal watch is not what you want to present them with.
I better get to bed. It’s going to be a long day tomorrow. The board has an executive session scheduled at 9:30 AM to discuss union negotiations. I know it’s a waste of time for me. After last night it was made clear to me that I will be heard but not considered. I’m wondering why I should bother.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I was surprised and disappointed when I heard the "listen, but not consider or capitulate" comment at Thurday's mediation session. The mediation may be free, but the board members are being paid for their attendance at these sessions. If, as Mrs. Dunphy implied, there has never been any intention to consider all board members' ideas and opinions then the board has already wasted 800 of our tax dollars on this mediation. Maybe it was best stopped now before more money was wasted. Apparently, as good an idea as this seemed to be, it was doomed from the start.
Kellie, I have also received comments about Wednesday board meeting. For those who were not present this is the statement I made regarding the levy.
"Because this board has been unable to decide what issues to survey the community on I can think of no better way to gauge the community's feelings on how this board is operating than this levy. By placing the levy on the ballot we are giving the people an opportunity to let their voices be heard. Their voices can speak loudly and tell us if they believe the board has been good stewards of their money or they can tell this board it's your turn to produce and improve. To the people I say I'm listening."
Thank you all!!!!!
To: The kind people who want to solve problems in our community,
I want to comment on the statements made in the ABJ documenting the comments by several of our BOE members. One BOE member encouraged the Federal mediation process to continue with the addition of a coach (mediator or facilitator). The other BOE member apparently disagreed and said, "BOE members need to learn on their own how to get through a work session."
Let's think about what this means.
Let's ignore 70 years of research into the process of building teams for purposes of my comments.
Let's ignore the contents of the material passed out by the Federal Mediator.
And, let's ignore the process of situational leadership -- where a leader begins by directing the action and moves into a coaching/supporting role and ends up in a delegating role -- after the team members are both willing and able to listen actively to each other and the different views of our community members.
And, let's just imagine for a minute what might happen if we threw our little and big people into work sessions where they needed to learn on their own how to get the work done.
If we expand this line of reasoning then we could reduce the number of teachers and coaches. Perhaps, as a long term goal, the need to ask for outside coaching on our team processes is a reasonable result.
But, as long as one member of the team thinks a need exists to have help with the processes of team building then the rest of the team members (who may not need help) will languish at a lower potential -- if they continue to ignore the needs of the one team member.
So, if our team is to realize it's full potential then we must 'leave no leader behind'.
I must admit the words of my 93 year old neighbor are echoing through my mind -- now. She says, "No matter who gets elected to public office, at some point, they will say or do something really dumb."
Kellie, at least they all agreed with you that the board needs more money to spend for conferences at the previous board meeting. See when it is for the good of all you can agree!
Post a Comment