By Antonio D. French
Filed Tuesday, February 13, 2007 at 8:47 PM
PUB DEF EXCLUSIVE POLL
As the State Board of Education prepares to meet Thursday, Feb. 15, to consider establishing a three-person appointed "transitional" board to run St. Louis Public Schools, it appears that most legislators from the City are clearly against the idea.
Here's how the St. Louis delegation stands on implementing the Danforth-Freeman Committee's recommendations at this time:
State Senators
Maida Coleman - Against
Jeff Smith - Undecided Against
Harry Kennedy - Against
State Representatives
Talibdin El-Amin - Against
Rodney Hubbard - For
Jeanette Mott Oxford - Against
Jamilah Nasheed - Against
Connie Johnson - Undecided
Robin Wright-Jones - Against
Rachel Storch - Against
Fred Kratky - Undecided/Leaning Against
Michael Vogt* - For/Prefers Mayoral Control
Michael Daus - Against
Thomas Villa* - Against
The State Board will be meeting at 9:00 a.m. on Thursday in Jefferson City at the Capitol Plaza Hotel, 415 W. McCarty Street.
*District includes parts of St. Louis County and the City of St. Louis
24 Comments:
Rodney Hubbard stances on education gives one the impression that he is in the wrong caucus, not to mention his stance on other issues.
2/13/2007 9:35 PM
Anonymous is a hater.
2/13/2007 9:55 PM
No, he just calls them as he sees them, like me. You seem more the hater.
Rodney's my brother, and I love him, but all too often he's a dope.
Havent decided yet if Jeff Smith is a dope. He would seem to be still thinking about it, himself.
And when Antonio says "most legislators", he mean most St. Louis legislators. There's a difference, isnt there? Will the rest of the state defer to stlouis if DESE recommends take-over. Dont know for sure, but dont think so necessarily.
2/13/2007 10:08 PM
Please excuse me for saying this, but Bill, in all candor, doesn't your odd behavior demonstrate that you are on dope?
2/13/2007 10:15 PM
Make that three of us! Either Bill is a "dope" or he's suffering from the longterm use of dope. Either way Bill, I hope you get the help you need.
In all honesty, I believe that big, warm smile is well suited for your work at Walmart. You do not seem to have the character that is suited for legislative work.
2/14/2007 9:00 AM
there is noting wrong with eccentric behavior...when appropriate.
How has this posting about who supports the state takeover gone to personally attacking a poster?
Shame.
Let's stick to the issue
2/14/2007 10:11 AM
this is a damn shame, to quote somebody we know... I can understand the African Americans taking a walk on this...they can't align themselves with the mayor lest they misrepresent their constituency.
Save Rodney Hubbard who has some balls.
But the southside pols need to grow a backbone, and realize there are only 10,000 pro-circus-circus school district people in this city, and most of them don't live on the southside. Time to grow a backbone people and don't pull a Jim Shrewsbury because some people are a little wet in their panties.
State Reps and Senators, are you listening? This is test of leadership, you can stand up and do what is best for the future or be a sheep and run with the herd of an extreme vocal minority, and hurt the city in the longterm.
Let's see who actually has some minerals.
2/14/2007 10:37 AM
Thank you to all the legislators who care to listen to the voice of the people. Above, call us a vocal minority if you want, but if the "majority" (which I don't believe you are) doesn't care enough to show up and speak up, then maybe a minority who cares is more educated and worthy of being listened to than a majority that knows nothing about the issue. The Harris Stowe meeting was a perfect opportunity to show who the majority was, and the answer was pretty obvious. The majority don't want the state intervening.
2/14/2007 10:42 AM
The majority don't want the state intervening.
Actually, the majority wants a school district that graduates kids ready to be useful citizens. Unfortunately, that same majority no longer knows how to get there -- and has pretty much given up on the SLPS.
Maybe intervention works. Maybe it doesn't. The current system certainly doesn't work.
2/14/2007 11:05 AM
Anonymous said... "Maybe intervention works. Maybe it doesn't. The current system certainly doesn't work."
I beg to differ. The current system of elected school boards has been in place for over a hundred years and has worked just fine for most of that time.
The current PEOPLE are what is failing, and as in any democracy, ELECTIONS are the cure for that ill.
2/14/2007 11:15 AM
One anonymous said: "Actually, the majority wants a school district that graduates kids ready to be useful citizens."
If that is true and the case, go after the parents who have abandoned their children's best interests and needs.
Stop blaming the schools for a societal problem rooted in the home.
2/14/2007 12:00 PM
> The current PEOPLE are what is
> failing
True. And not to excuse their bad behavior, it isn't clear to me that any people can succeed where this crop have failed.
> and as in any
> democracy, ELECTIONS are the
> cure for that ill.
Ah, yes! Democracy cures all ills of governance. Well, perhaps, but only if the electorate roughly approaches the Jeffersonian ideal. I am not so sanguine about the electorate in question here.
2/14/2007 12:06 PM
Regardless of your political persuasion; it is patently unconstitutional to nullify the results of a public election just because you don't agree with the results. That is a de facto disenfranchisement. The fact that the 1999 deseg. settlement allows for such a takeover by the state through a legislative action does not mitigate the rights of the public to elect their own officials. The 1999 deseg. agreement is unconstitutional on that one provision. No legislature, government executive or bureaucrat has the right to disenfranchise ANYONE. If someone woke up and challenged the settlement on that one fact--(and prosecuted the major players who engineered that aspect of the agreement)--the public would win. As for the failures of the district; consider the truth of the matter. These are societal failures based in an unfair economy which is hostile to family life. It's pretty difficult to tend to your children and work 2-3 jobs just to keep the heat on and food on the table. This is something Slay, Clay, Danforth, et. al should experience first hand. I wonder how well their children would do under the same circumstances. As for the financial mess--place the blame squarely where it belongs--Slay, Schoemehl and their tax abatement schemes for wealthy slackers slumming for a while. The city in effect has given away the school district's money, without the distict's permission. SLPS and the parents should SUE THE CITY FOR RESTORATIVE FUNDING WITH INTEREST COMPOUNDED DAILY. That would shore up the district financially, if paired with receipt of monies earmarked for the district but reneged upon by the former democratic governor Bob Holden. Finally, if you want a good system; you have to do something truly radical. EMPOWER YOUR TEACHERS INSTEAD OF UNDERMINING. RETURN TO REASONABLE DISCIPLINE AND RESPECT FOR HOME, CHURCH AND SCHOOL, AND HAVE A ZERO TOLERANCE POLICY FOR VIOLENCE. KICK THE BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE, THE POLITICIANS AND THE LAWYERS OUT OF THE PROCESS AND LET THE TEACHERS ...TEACH!!!
J. Gadfly
2/14/2007 2:08 PM
What happens if the state board votes to accept the Danforth scheme? Can the legislators challenge them?
Are there any tentative plans in place to fight a takeover in court?
If so, does the state board know of that possibility?
2/14/2007 2:21 PM
Dear Anonymous,
In response to your questions; keep in mind some basic constitutional law that Danforth/Slay, et al., have conveniently forgotten. Our system of laws is based on the legal idea of 'precedent.' Since there is no precedent that says we can't challenge the state board or the powers that be--there is no reason why they can't be challenged in court. Not only can the legislature challenge the state board; but the citizens can do the same thing. Citizen challenges occur through the initiative/referendum procedure if the desire is to change a law or to force a law's repeal--without the legislature. Otherwise, the court challenge could be established through a citizen based class action lawsuit on several grounds. One ground would be the de facto disenfranchisement of an entire population through the set aside of public election results. The claim could be made that if the legislature or a bureaucrat can arbitrarily set aside the results of a fair public election on a small election--then this could be done ON ANY ELECTION--EVEN PRESIDENTIAL NATIONAL ELECTIONS. This sets a very dangerous precendent. Another aspect is the fact that the legislature crafted with the court an unsound settlement agreement regarding the deseg. situation. They may be entitled to a remedy but the parties involved do not have a right to wrangle away anyone else's rights now or in the future. It's not that the state board of education has no say in the accreditation process--they do. They DON'T have the right to negotiate away voters' rights to future elections as a remedy for past failures or crimes. This would be a procedural remedy the court could grant which would also stop the pols from overturning a fair election. I'm sure that the state board, and Slay, and Danforth, etc. KNOW THIS. THEY DON'T CARE. THIS IS AS RACIST AND CLASSIST A BIGOTRY AS IT GETS. IF THESE PEOPLE CARED SO MUCH ABOUT THE CHILDREN THEY WOULD END THE TAX ABATEMENTS FOR 25 YEARS, INCREASE FUNDING TO THE SCHOOLS, ALLOW TEACHERS A SAY IN THE VERY WORK FOR WHICH THEY ARE BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE. The sad part is the union lawyers for 420 know this too--but the democratic movers and shakers don't want the public to know. We need a fighter for an attorney. I would recommend Doris Gregory Black. She's smart, fights smart and tenacious. If you want to know more--post something here for J. Gadfly.
2/14/2007 2:38 PM
Most school districts in the country have locally elected school board members.
However, the nationwide failure of urban school districts has led to some important changes in recent years. In many big cities (which include Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, and Providence), mayors and/or governors now appoint the school boards.
St. Louis is not alone in looking for a new model of governance to improve performance.
2/14/2007 4:34 PM
That would be the subject of the article in the Post today, which also noted that none of these experiments have been a definite success.
2/14/2007 4:45 PM
What poor timing Maida and Robin picked to convince their non-City colleagues to vote against DESE intervention but for local control of SLMPD.
2/14/2007 5:25 PM
What poor timing Maida and Robin picked to convince their non-City colleagues to vote against DESE intervention but for local control of SLMPD.
That won't be what they are doing. They'll be working their colleagues over the next few legislative sessions to write legislation on what the district will look like AFTER the transition board goes away.
The ship on the transition board sailed back in 1999. If the board imposes it, that's what we'll have for a while.
The union, the legislators, City Hall, and pretty much everyone else has figured that out already.
2/14/2007 6:41 PM
Life's too short and my days too long to spend more than one second trying to talk some sense to those horses' patoots, Louis, Dewey and Screwy, aka Matt, Star and someone who doesnt know their name, but I'll take the second so people know that I dont care a rat's behind what people like that think. "Dont let others define you." Pliny the Elder "Those without reasons resort to ad hominem attacks." Cato (he spoke Greek but used Latin phrases).
I dont really care what you think, nor does anyone else besides the three of you, so you can respond if you like polemical onanism (I think I'm using it right; if not, I may be in some trouble or confusion here; in any case, you can look it up if your coloring books have an index; my dictionary, Webster's New World, doesnt have it; I sometimes think my vocabulary is bigger than its; in this case, it would be a tie, but I digress), but for the record:
1. I presume you wouldnt say those silly things if you agreed with my points. No substantive responses, so name calling? Your moms must be so proud.
2. Cant imagine what you mean by my odd behavior, but let me guess.
I spoke about feeling vulnerable and fragile sometimes. Is my feeling that way or speaking about it that you object to. Making fun of people who sometimes (not often) feel bad about life. Again, your moms must be so proud. Making fun of others to make yourself feel better? Impressive. So who would you think, then, has the more significant issues, me or you?
How about a referendum on that?
We sort of are, the election; we'll see how it goes.
3. 8 good years on the schoolboard so you cant be referring to that.
4. Running for offices I think I'd do well in? That's a problem just cause I dont win often?
5. And anonymous, we may get to see how suited I am for legislative work. Your character doesnt seem suited for having a name. What's up with that.
ok, your minute is up and so is mine. I cant believe I dont have better things to do. I do, and sleep is first on the list.
Off to slay dragons tomorrow. Slayed enough fools for today.
But hey, dont let me stop you from embarrassing yourself and your families. As I said, dont let others define you, and that goes for me and you too. I'm sure y'all are very nice and charming under other circumstances. Good luck with that.
2/14/2007 11:13 PM
Once again, the voices of dictatorship and bigotry speak loud and clear. It doesn't matter whether other munincipalities have school boards appointed by governors or mayors--that process is NOT CONSTITUTIONAL. While I agree that urban school systems must change--I DO NOT SUPPORT STEALING VOTING RIGHTS FROM THE VERY PUBLIC INVOLVED LOCALLY. How ironic, that when Republicans under Bush suggest such a thing the Dems scream "fascism"; yet when a democratic mayor like Slay does the same thing--it's all for the children. Stop trying to frame the argument around bogus rationales. NO GOVERNOR, MAYOR, LEGISLATURE, BUREAUCRACY, OR EVEN THE PRESIDENT HAS THE RIGHT TO DENY THE VOTE TO ANY CITIZEN. WHEN THIS RIGHT IS DENIED IN SMALL ELECTIONS--IT EVENTUALLY WILL BE DENIED IN LARGER ONES INCLUDING PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS. If the powers that be were truly interested in the welfare of the children; there would have been an honest dialogue about the situation involving all stakeholders, TEACHERS INCLUDED, with a positive plan for action. This action plan would include restoring funding which was stolen by City Hall in the form of tax abatements for some 25 years with an option for 25 more. The plan would also include empowering teachers so true innovation can occur. Accountability would be accompanied by transparency, (especially of the monies involved). Reasonable discipline would be restored with a zero tolerance for violence. The same flexibility permitted charter schools would also be extended to public schools. If the rules and regs dictated by the state are too cumbersome for charter schools--then doesn't that beg the question that they are too cumbersome for anyone? The politicians, at the state and local level would have to account for monies withheld, and/or diverted to other projects such as highway construction. The Governor would have to explain his denial of Medicaid benefits to poor children. Kent King would have to justify how he certified Roberti to be a superintendent with no experience. In short, the state of Missouri would have to make amends for it's racist past and equally racist present. You do not improve schools by withdrawing funding necessary for their operation. I find it ironic that the same politicians who would deny children neighborhood schools, who would deny the public local control of their schools, who would deny the citizens their right to vote--have no problem sending corporate welfare for wealthy sports team owners. The only question remaining is...how large a civil rights lawsuit and an additional breach of contract lawsuit can these politicians afford to fight? You're right---we do need reform--reform of a political system bent on denying citizens their right to vote. If you are so convinced that the present BOE is incompetent--then let the democratic process work--and vote them out of office.
J. Gadfly
2/15/2007 9:52 AM
J. Gadfly
2/14/2007 2:08 PM said.....
"If someone woke up and challenged the settlement on that one fact--(and prosecuted the major players who engineered that aspect of the agreement)--".....
Bill Purdy would have to be on the list of those prosecuted, he was on the Board when it was "engineered".
2/15/2007 6:46 PM
At least Senator Coleman and Rep. Wright-Jones is standing FOR and AGAINST something. Knowing you will win some and lose some, they decided to at least do something.
Stop b****ing and find out where all the other politicans are on the issues. Or, is it that when their voices aren't heard that makes you think they're brave?
At least I know that the two legislators I voted for are working.
2/15/2007 6:55 PM
Now tell us which of these legislators who IS AGAINST: (1)attended public schools?, (2) when is the last time they visited a public school [for something other than a photo op]?, (3)which of them currently has children in public schools?; (4)and lastly which of them has sponsored legislation that benefits THE CHILDREN in public schools??!!!???
No need to start calling them, I can tell you the answer to all of the above is NONE!
2/16/2007 12:21 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home