By Antonio D. French
Filed Friday, December 29, 2006 at 11:20 AM
More elected officials are joining calling on state education officials to conduct public hearings before any action on St. Louis Public Schools is taken. Labels: Schools, State_House
State Representatives Jamilah Nasheed, Jeanette Mott Oxford, Robin Wright Jones, school board members Bill Purdy and Donna Jones, Committeemen Jesse Todd and Jay Ozier, Rev. James T. Morris, activists Percy Green and Jamala Rogers, school board and aldermanic candidate Bill Haas, and representatives of the unions representing teachers and admin istrators joined with parents this morning for a press conference outside the downtown headquarters of SLPS.
Nasheed, who was the first to call for public hearings, said there should be no takeover of the school district at this time.
"We're demanding that the Missouri Department of Education hold public hearings here in the City of St. Louis before they make any decision to take over the public schools and take away the people's right to vote," said Nasheed.
Also this morning, Comptroller Darlene Green and state senators Maida Coleman and Jeff Smith issued statements in support of public hearings.
"Public input will be essential to forming a consensus about the direction of our schools in the important weeks and months ahead," said the joint statement from Coleman and Smith.
"Ultimately, we all want the same thing, which is for our children to have a safe environment to gain a quality education. To help achieve this goal, the public should feel it has been involved in the process."
41 Comments:
The election of Downs and Jones was the result of a grass roots effort.
Start now!! Spread the word!!
12/29/2006 12:25 PM
The same people making the calls are same people responsible for mis-educating the children. Their day in court is over. The state should intervene and save the children.
12/29/2006 2:19 PM
Why is it only those politicians benefitting from the teachers' union are those speaking up? Perhaps they're thinking of the teachers' jobs first.
12/29/2006 2:44 PM
Public input can only contribute to a better solution.
Mayor Slay endorsed Rochelle Moore and appointed Veronica O'Brien. What sane person thinks that he would do any better with his appointement to the 3 person board?
12/29/2006 2:58 PM
And Downs and Jones voted mostly with O'Brien. How sane is that?
12/29/2006 3:21 PM
Let the hearings begin!!We dont want an appointed board by the govenor and mayor,they wont even be in office next time thier running.If the state wont do it them self,then we will elect 2 new members in April that will continue with the positive momentum that has been started with the last elections.WAKE UP DESE AND SMELL THE COFFEE.....NO CHANGE TO THE BOARD...
12/29/2006 3:23 PM
Anonymous said...
And Downs and Jones voted mostly with O'Brien. How sane is that?
12/29/2006 3:21 PM
Don't blame Downs and Jones if O'Brien went through a period of temporary sanity long enough to do something about Floyd Irons and his buddy Greg Williams. If she stumbled into supporting a decent professional superintendent to replace Williams, that should not be a black mark against Downs and Jones.
Whatever offer they made to O'Brien that she could not refuse to get her to go back to being a Slay supporter remains puzzling. It had to be something either rewarding or threatening.
12/29/2006 3:45 PM
"She can barely speak - she must have went to school in the ST LOUIS city public schools."
You must have GONE to a charter school.
12/29/2006 3:58 PM
For some time this blog has spoken about me and usually in a negative light. For the record I have come a long way in life and with my sanity in place. If anyone would like to discuss any issues with me then identify yourself and I will respond. This community has has since the fall to organize and request hearings and no one did a thing. NOT EVEN THE ELECTED OFFICIALS. The board could have had hearings but no one did a thing. Dr.Danforth,Mr.Freeman and their committee have made their recommendation to the state. It seems a bit late for the troops to start from square one.
Again, any comments regarding my role should be directed at me so I can respond.
Veronica O'Brien
12/29/2006 5:00 PM
Veronica, you treat some people like dirt and then expect others to direct comments directly to you? You hurt your reputation and credibility all by yourself. You don't keep your word to the voters or anyone else. Your mood swings are so wide no one wants to get caught in the middle of one.
The mayor questioned your sanity, and now your supporters do too.
12/29/2006 6:10 PM
Do you have any feelings of gratitude toward the members of the board with whom you now disagree---for voting the funds to pay for extra security for you the day after someone pumped 12 bullets into Timothy Bacon?
12/29/2006 6:15 PM
Ms. O'Brien is clearly in an agitated state without any apparent reason. (the only reasonable explanantion is that she is Slay's choice for the board to begin with and that he expects her to intimidate people in order to do his bidding, i.e. Shoemehl) I was at 2 different candidate forums when she was running for a seat on the board. When I asked her a challenging question on those occasions, I was caught off guard with the edge in her tone of voice. It was like she was expecting a fight or argument. Recently, she publicly commented that Mr. Purdy, another board member, is "insignificant" to her.
If she was my employee, I order her to contact the company EAP counselor for a depression screening or something.
12/29/2006 6:20 PM
I congratulate all the ellected officials that came to support Nesheed. At least they are standing up for what they think is right, whether wrong or not.
The public should stand up and speak out. Apathy is a deadly desease and those that suffer from the illness need to be committed.
Don't let Tom Villa be right. He may take control over the 5th senitorial seat after Meida Coleman finishes her excellent term.
12/29/2006 6:23 PM
most of you are fixed on O'Brien. To keep bad mouthing her only hurts your cause. If it had not been for her then you would not have gotten as far as you did. You can call hernames but she made you all credible and you know it. Now you are left alone with no help and you won't get far.
12/29/2006 8:38 PM
Whatever Slay did he seems to be winning. Maybe Bill Purdy can save you with all of his "power".
12/29/2006 8:40 PM
Its about politics and not the kids, and its coming from both sides of the isle.
The school board does in fact need some oversight and the state does need to HELP out (not take over). Has anyone ever thought about getting some recommendations from the people on the front lines like the teachers and maybe even the students. Obviously I'm skeptical of all politicians being the ones dictating the process of the SLPS.
The situation isnt getting any better and some long-term strategic plans need to be put into place, that means sticking with a superintendent for ATLEAST 3 years and see where you are and re-hash the situation to move forward.
12/29/2006 8:50 PM
"most of you are fixed on O'Brien. To keep bad mouthing her only hurts your cause. If it had not been for her then you would not have gotten as far as you did. You can call hernames but she made you all credible and you know it. Now you are left alone with no help and you won't get far."
12/29/2006 8:38 PM
I'm not sure how you come up with the term "most" here. Even a casual observer can see how Ms. O'Brien brought attention to herself with radical changes in her stated beliefs and stances. The post of "anonymous" here that is signed as written by Veronica O'Brien is strikingly similar to the way Ms. O'Brien would speak to people when she was a candidate. Her comments turned venomous at times once she became a board member. Maybe this diplomatic tone indicates that the power has shifted away from Slay and his minions like O'Brien. Everyone I've spoken to who voted for O'Brien are feeling betrayed.
12/29/2006 9:48 PM
Doesn't the following sound just like Veronica? "She made you all credible and you know it." What does that mean? Sounds like Veronica to me, taking credit for what she didn't do and taking no responsibility for what she does do.
"Anonymous said...
most of you are fixed on O'Brien. To keep bad mouthing her only hurts your cause. If it had not been for her then you would not have gotten as far as you did. You can call hernames but she made you all credible and you know it. Now you are left alone with no help and you won't get far."
12/29/2006 8:38 PM
12/29/2006 10:00 PM
Veronica, in your posting you claim to have come a long way in your life. If that is in fact true then why would you work so hard now to make such a spectacle of yourself? I agree with the comment that even your supporters have no respect for you anymore. You're a drama queen and at the risk of the children, you will take this as far as you have to in order to keep the focus on yourself.
12/30/2006 4:03 AM
I dont think ad hominem attacks on Veronica help our cause. The issue is state take over now, and we should stick to the issue. Criticizing others for no constructive reason, diminishes us and our cause, I believe. The reality is, even if Veronica had stayed the course, the recommendations of the committee probably would have been the same. Though at least there'd be a fourth vote to sue to stop the takeover. She's my friend and I love her; she has been brave for many years in the face of adversity, and did help us get where we are, under Bourisaw's leadership. I dont agree with her recent positions, and dont think she's a good president, whose job is to build consensus and speak for the Board. And we can criticize actions without denigrading the person. Hate the game not the players.
Let's stick to the issues, and the issue is this: I was on the Board when the deseg agreement was signed in 1999. We got a provision that the state agreed to that if the district became unaccredited, we would have 2 years to regain accreditation before any take-over. Any way you spin the Committee's recommendations, it's a state take-over. When state legislation is proposed to usurp the legal power of the elected Board, it's a take-over. The Deseg Agreement forbids state take-over except under the state circumstances, and this would include direct or indirect, de jure (by law) or de facto (by fact), as I'm competent that a court will affirm. If not before the election of the next two board members, than certainly after.
12/30/2006 11:00 AM
So, Bill Haas, you're saying it's a done deal? If so, what's the fuss about? Why are we discussing it?
12/30/2006 12:19 PM
You all are discussing the inevitable bacause you have no plan of your own.
Neither side is focused on the children, just alot of polical posturing, while the children fall through the cracks.
The district has been failing for years. It was failing before Roberti. It was failing before Schoehmel and Archibald. According to data from the district and the state, SLPS has not had a year during which science, math or communication arts proficiency level were at or above 50%.
**Why is so many students being left behind acceptable to the People Against Change? It's no diffeent than Bush's war in which he thinks the level of Iraqi civilian casualties and the loss of life & limb by our soldiers are acceptable losses and that things will get beter so long as we stay the course.
****Things won't get better until we change strategies and SLPS needs state oversite just like Bush needs congressional oversite.
12/30/2006 1:30 PM
"Fed Up said...
"You all are discussing the inevitable bacause you have no plan of your own.
Neither side is focused on the children, just alot of polical posturing, while the children fall through the cracks."
There is a plan. It involves Purdy and the two constructive people who were elected to the board last spring. 2 more will be added, to replace the bitter, obstructive lame ducks from Slayville. It involves sticking with a superintendent who understands the financial and accreditation issues which have to be dealt with.
"The district has been failing for years. It was failing before Roberti. It was failing before Schoehmel and Archibald."
That is probably true to an extent---but the loss of accreditation points has been enormous during the period with Slay making so many appointment. That is a big part of why all his choices are being discarded in favor of parents with children in slps. The takeover actually does a little of preserving the status quo power of Slay which he cannot retain in a fair election, and a lot of non status quo from outstate republicans and their governor who are salivating over the idea of having an educational playpen with no real accountability---they will take credit for everything good, and will take the attitude of what did you expect for the not so good.
We are getting some oversight regarding Bush all right----it has a lot to do with something we did in November----a vote from the people.
That kind of oversight will soon be taken away from voters in St. Louis.
12/30/2006 2:48 PM
Fed up... you're ignoring certain facts and listing only one. You state a few opinions as though you have a better idea or as though you've been working toward a solution.
The accreditation scores and the financial situtation tells it all. Look at those numbers from before the Slay minions took control until today. The SLPS were heading toward accreditation before Slay got his hands on things and now they are further away. That must be too obvious for people. The SLPS are nearly bankrupt now and they weren't before Slay got his hands on the budget. That also must be too obvious. Therefore, it should also be obvious to the most casual observer that Slay should keep his hands off the SLPS. The "State" wants to hand the reins back to him.
What logic are you using to come to the conclusions you've written?
12/30/2006 2:49 PM
wow-------anonymous from 2:48 and Snead Hearn from 2:49-----I guarantee that we are two different people---who seem to be thinking some similar thought.
12/30/2006 2:52 PM
Thank you Antonio for letting us all have a forum for our feelings.
Anonymous said...12/30/2006 2:48 PM
I have said before that I don't like the direction that either one of the board majorities have taken the district in. I believe, like so many others, that parents should be given a choice of where to educate their children. Magnet schools should be open to more students, more magent schools should exist and there should be more of them in North St. Louis.
Parents should also have the right to take advantage of the generosity of others to send their children to better performing schools in or out of the district.
In your statement -"That is probably true to an extent, but the loss of accreditation points has been enormous during the period with Slay making so many appointment." -you conviently dismiss that the loss of accreditation pre-Slay involvement had an impact on a great number of children.
And if you really want change start by getting more people to the poles on election day. A 20% turnout is not a mandate to go back to the status quo. If anything it says that the mojority of voters were not impressed with any of the candidates.
If you can't do better than 20% in April it will show that most of St. Louis is rejecting this "new direction" as well.
12/30/2006 9:35 PM
snead hearn - My comments are no more opinion than yours therefore the moajority of your comment deserves no response.
I will reply to two though:
1) "you have a better idea or as though you've been working toward a solution"
- I have, I've decided to support school choice.
2)"SLPS were heading toward accreditation before Slay got his hands on things"
- Heading towards accreditation is not accreditation. So why is it you get to decide whose children get left behind while the district pursues the ego driven goals of individuals? Peter, Donna and Ron got their children into Magnet schools. What about those children who are not so fortunate. But it would seem to you and those that think like you that those are just acceptable losses in order that the teachers get their paychecks.
12/30/2006 9:50 PM
Fed Up said...
snead hearn - My comments are no more opinion than yours therefore the moajority of your comment deserves no response.
I will reply to two though:
1) "you have a better idea or as though you've been working toward a solution"
- I have, I've decided to support school choice.
2)"SLPS were heading toward accreditation before Slay got his hands on things"
- Heading towards accreditation is not accreditation. So why is it you get to decide whose children get left behind while the district pursues the ego driven goals of individuals? Peter, Donna and Ron got their children into Magnet schools. What about those children who are not so fortunate. But it would seem to you and those that think like you that those are just acceptable losses in order that the teachers get their paychecks.
12/30/2006 9:50 PM
And how exactly do you think school choice will solve the problem at SLPS? Do you REALLY believe that any metropolitan area can thrive without free, public education? You've bought into the spin the politicians have put on it..."School Choice". Do you know how this will work exactly? Where do you think the money will come from to transport and educate a student at a suburban school? If you're worried about students who weren't able to attend a Magnet School why wouldn't you be concerned about students who will remain in the SLPS when the "Voucher Kids" have bailed to a suburban school?
By the time the next governor and mayor decide that vouchers aren't working, Slay and Co. will have sold off vacant school buildings like they did when Roberti was running things. They'll be laughing all the way to the bank and the former Voucher Kids will look to their home city for an education but there won't be any room for them. So, we'll have to try to generate interest in building new schools. By then Slay and Freeman and Suggs will have formed a school building construction company to make even more money out of the havoc caused by Slay.
You have NO IDEA what your decision to support school choice is based upon. You have no facts whatsoever.
You've been duped.
12/30/2006 10:23 PM
"then [not than] certainly after", of course for all you English erudite pendants.
12/30/2006 10:41 PM
that's, "of course, [comma] for all . . . "
how embarrassing -
as my dates were saying tonight, I'm just a little too fast sometimes.
12/30/2006 10:42 PM
I think the State should take over Snead Hearn and Fed Up, where a transitional board of horses' patoots might really do some good, or at least no harm.
12/30/2006 10:48 PM
Fed up...
"What about those children who are not so fortunate. But it would seem to you and those that think like you that those are just acceptable losses in order that the teachers get their paychecks."
Are you serious? So teachers can get their paychecks? I made more money before becoming a teacher and made the conscious decision to take a pay cut to teach your children. Then I buy paper, pencils, use my personal phone to contact parents, buy gifts, notebooks, etc...
The teachers took a PAY CUT two years ago. We did not get a raise as Bob Archibald wants you to believe. We are working more days a year, more hours a day, for less money per hour. And working conditions SUCK for many of us.
Go ahead and pull your kids out because quite frankly I'm Fed Up with people who don't know what the hell they are talking about saying that all we care about is money.
12/30/2006 11:36 PM
Jim Heger - I will try to be a little less general in my comments. I have said several times that I admire those teachers who are in this because they truely feel that all children need and deserve a world class education.
However, my admiration for those who are doing all that they can do with the resources provided does not excuse those who give up on the children they are supposed to be teaching. NOr does it excues the union fromdefending them. Nor does it excuse the contract stipulations which make it difficult to remove those teachers from the classroom.
Contrary to your comments about me not knowing what I am takiing about are grossly inaccurate. The only reason I post anonymously is because of the threats that would come to me and my job (in the district). I look at those who have dared to speak against the failings in the district and the torment they are put through and admire them as well.
During a period of my life I decided to accept public assistance (Section 8 vouchers) for the living situation of my family. It would have been illegal for someone to allow me to use that voucher were I chose to. Why not offer that same choice to parents?
I also accepted gifts of charity which I am sure the recipients then wrote off on their taxes. Why not offer that same choice to parents?
We all should be working on legislation which benefitts all children and stop creating these "Boogeymen" and stop the promotion of fear of others ideas.
12/31/2006 9:45 AM
Fed Up said...
"I also accepted gifts of charity which I am sure the recipients then wrote off on their taxes. Why not offer that same choice to parents?
We all should be working on legislation which benefitts all children and stop creating these "Boogeymen" and stop the promotion of fear of others ideas."
12/31/2006 9:45 AM
Fed up,
You're not thinkning this school "choice" thing all the way through. The types of politics we're dealing with now is more fitting of an oligarchy and not a democracy. You would be putting the education of the students of the largest district in the state into the hands of a few wealthy and powerful politicians who have their own agenda. History has shown time and again that this is a recipe for disaster for everyone but the few decision makers.
Slay is desperately trying to accomplish something, anything while he is mayor. How about Busch Stadium and Ballpark Village? There's an example although it's in reverse. In that case, it was supposed to be financed with private money. Those individuals who said they would finance this, simply changed their minds and decided not to put up so much money. Guess who is going to have to foot the bill for Ballpark Village? You and I.
Tell me who you think is going to pay the education costs for a student who might use a voucher? Where will that money come from? Is more money going to become available all of a sudden when someone cooses to use a voucher? Just answer these questions, please.
12/31/2006 12:09 PM
There will be some money coming in at first. In Oakland, the Broad foundation jumped on the opportunity to weild influence when they did the 2003 takeover.
The prized cash cows that they look for, are students achieving below grade level without disabilities to make them expensive to educate. It works well for a year or two, and produces the necessary stats. The line to get in to those schools gets longer and disturbingly exclusionary, the foundation funds grow smaller, the superhuman young teachers they recruit especially for their "choices" flame out from the increased workload and----as happened in Oakland----they run the appointed guy out of town.
Oakland had advantages St. Louis does not have in choosing students for the showcase schools---but it remains a pyramid scheme.
12/31/2006 12:47 PM
How interesting. Creg Williams was slated to attend the Broad Foundation as many of his assistants had done before him.
Anyone have any details about the Broad Foundation and who funds it? I have an idea that their mission is to train educators to administer urban school districts with a corporate ideology.
12/31/2006 1:06 PM
These are long articles---maybe it is not fair to print them out here---I found them by typing " "Broad Foundation Oakland Schools"
Fair and balanced---I actually found the Broad Foundations puff piece more frightening than the one about Randy Ward. (the guy they rand out of town last August)
The Broad Foundation -- News Release
... schools to become managers in urban education as part of the third Broad ... Ind., Miami-Dade County Schools, New York City Department of Education, Oakland ...www.broadfoundation.org/med-news/2005-0801.shtml - 7k -
STOP RANDY WARD
... Superintendent of Schools- can do for the people of Oakland? ... Eli Broad, whose Broad Foundation seeks to privatize public schools and undermine unions. ...www.stoprandyward.com
12/31/2006 1:50 PM
Thansk for the details about Broad Fndtn. It's about what I suspected. I reaffirms my belief that the problems at SLPS are a symptom of an issue way bigger than what we're dealing with.
We are on the front line of a battle in a big war that is underway.
12/31/2006 2:13 PM
Fed up...Sorry about the pissiness...you're right, generalizations are dangerous.
Posting anonymously is certainly your right...but doesn't the fact that you are scared to put your name to your beliefs support the need for groups which protect your rights, such as the teacher's union?
12/31/2006 2:24 PM
I found this kind of amusing---it is from a story in 2004, when the now gone Randy Ward of oakland was doing what Broad foundation people do---------
"The teachers union opposes the closures and regards the school takeover plan with suspicion. The union and the district are in contract talks, and the teachers' harsh view of the school takeover plan reflects a broader mistrust of Ward across the city.
On the one hand, the state administrator has reduced operating expenditures by more than $17 million and has a track record of restoring another bankrupt district in Los Angeles to fiscal solvency.
But many Oakland teachers dislike his austerity measures, his proposed school closures and his adherence to a phonics program embraced by the state called Open Court."
http://www.susanohanian.org/outrage_fetch.php?id=281
12/31/2006 8:35 PM
With Broad in our schools we have the opportunity to fatten coprporate pockets at the expense of the taxpayer in ways not seen since Enron. In fact, their presence at SLPS was jokingly called "Ed-ron" - but the joke is more sad than funny.
1/01/2007 10:09 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home