Contentious School Board Meetings Yield Higher Attendance, Plus a Vocabulary Lesson

Every cloud has a silver lining. Even the contentiousness that has characterized Santa Clara Unified School District Board meetings since the new board was seated in December -- although that may be hard to believe for those unfortunate enough to have endured those marathon meetings. 

The upside is that that many more people are attending board meetings and actively participating. And that, after all is what democracy is all about.

Another upside is that the community is getting to know some people, who are clearly articulate and informed about education, and, refreshingly, aren't connected with the usual suspects in Santa Clara politics. 

Let's hope that some of them come forward to run for Santa Clara Unified school board in 2014. Who knows, we may even see a new face from the South of Forest neighborhood if that area is successful in its fight to rationalize* district boundaries in this town. 

*Per Merriam-Webster, there are several meanings for the verb 'rationalize' besides "providing plausible but untrue reasons for conduct." These include: 

• To bring into accord with reason 
• To apply the principles of scientific management for a desired result
• To substitute a natural for a supernatural explanation
• To free from irrational parts (mathematical)

It seems to me that all of these apply to California's crazy quilt of school districts. They defy reason, are extremely costly and inefficient, are zealously defended by the High Priests of the Status Quo as divine directives, and need to be purged of irrelevant baggage that obstructs proper decision-making. 

School Accountability Report Cards, Public Access to Meetings On the Agenda for Jan. 10 SCUSD Board Meeting

The Santa Clara Unified School District (SCUSD) has another full agenda for its first meeting of 2013.

Interim annual reports about current bond projects are on the agenda. Both bond issues – 2004's Measure J ($315 million) and 2010's Measure H ($81 million) – are for capital improvements to school facilities and both have a clean bill of health.

The district is also opening a request for bids to provide travel services for the district for the rest of the school year for multi-day field trips, athletic competitions, band performances, educational study trips, and special events.

The board will also be asked to approve hiring an Interim Assistant Superintendent, Business Services Division, Dana Taylor, at $85.00 per hour for up to 960 hours, for the remainder of the school year. This follows the retirement of the former Asst. Superintendent, Jim Luyau, after a 2012 extraordinary audit (report and analysis)  by the County Office of Education found questionable accounting practices on the part of district employees who were handling bookkeeping for two other county education agencies. Dana Taylor has experience in Moreland School District and was recommended by the Santa Clara County Office of Education.

Discussion Items:

School Accountability Report Cards (SARCs). These are detailed analyses of each school in the district, including: physical plant, materials, per-pupil spending, teacher salaries, demographics, and student performance. One observations: teacher salary and per-pupil spending doesn't predict student performance, but – no surprise – the percent of economically disadvantaged students does.

This item could be an opportunity for en encore of the Dec. 13th out-of-the-blue proposal made by Board Member Ina Bendis to make Bracher a K-6 – or K-8 – school. Making such a proposal through a routine Board Agenda, and without prior investigation or discussion is highly unusual, and provoked a tsunami of criticism from district teachers and parents, and accusations of hidden agendas and conflicts of interest. Board Member Chris Stampolis' children attend Bracher. Bendis has donated to Stampolis' political campaigns and provided him with pro bono legal advice. 

Posting Past Board Agendas and Minutes on the District Website, Video-Recording Board Meetings, proposed by Board President Christine Kolterman. There has been discussion over the years about bigger online archives, video-recording (instead of just audio-recording) and TV broadcast of board meetings. In the past the board majority ruled that the additional equipment, data storage and staff costs weren't justifiable. 

The irony here is that two sitting board members who opposed these moves lost re-election campaigns arguably because of the opacity of board proceedings. In the past, the Board kept detailed minutes of discussions. Baord Member Bendis objected, claiming that the minutes were biased, and the Board now keeps an action-only summary. 

Update from the Superintendent regarding the District's Extraordinary Audit Report: The Superintendent will present the district's 3-part plan to prevent similar abuses in the future:

·      Internal Control Structure: e.g. documentation

·      Hard Controls: signing authorities, monitoring

·      Soft Controls: social, i.e. employee roles

Public Access to Board Meetings.

Expect plenty of discussion on this topic, precipitated by the last three board meetings (Dec. 13, 18, and 19) which saw overflow crowds and audience behavior more familiar in the context of a sports competition than a school board meeting. A change of venue as well as rotating meeting locations will be discussed.

Board Members Ina Bendis and Christine Koltermann are trying to frame this as a civil rights issue on the grounds that the people who didn't get seats – some of whom may not speak English and at least one of whom was apparently disabled – were denied access to public meetings. As these meetings also were the setting for harsh criticism of the actions of the board's new majority – Bendis, Koltermann, Michele Ryan, and Stampolis – Bendis and Koltermann also allege that the their critics have suppressed other points of view by taking up all the seats.

Bendis previously set the tone for this discussion of civil rights and public decorum by referring to those who had reserved seats as an "exalted class." Over her 6-year tenure on the Board, Bendis has contributed to the lack of decorum she now bemoans with other similarly sarcastic remarks belittling other board members and district employees. She has also the subject of two harassment complaints brought against SCUSD. And last year she filed a police complaint (subsequently dismissed) against former Board Member Pat Flot, claiming that Flot had physically threatened her. Flot claims this was aimed at intimidating Flot from running for the board seat that opened up when long-time board member Don Bordenave retired.

Bendis also has claimed special privileges for herself, including speaking beyond the two-minute limit and a private office, on the grounds that she has ADHD, a disability that must legally be accommodated. Despite her ADHD, in the course of her 60+ years Bendis managed to earn a Ph.D.,, M.D.,  J.D. and admission to the California Bar.

Also under discussion

• A process for qualifying search firms for finding a new Superintendent to replace Bobbie Plough who announced her retirement following Dec. 13's chaotic, 7-hour board meeting. This makes the third time SCUSD has hired a new Superintendent in 6 years. At the Dec. 19 meeting, Bendis proposed a subcommittee appointed by Board President Koltermann to research search firms. This was voted down 6-1 by the board. 
• New instructional materials/resources for AP Foreign Language
• New editions of handwriting and literacy intervention – who guessed that penmanship was still taught in school? You certainly couldn't prove it by my son's writing.
• New Construction and Engineering Program Teacher position
• Scheduling an SCUSD Board Governance Retreat

No indication about whether there will be a report from the Stampolis and Ryan about their recent trip to China, sponsored by the Hanban Institute of the Chinese Ministry of Education. 

The Empire Strikes Back

At the Dec. 13 meeting the SCUSD board of trustees, the comrades of the politburo had to hear from critics. So Ina Bendis and Christine Koltermann are taking action to remedy what they are renaming a "civil rights violation" with a "process to improve access to board meetings."

(It's curious that this agenda memo was prepared on Sunday, but the special board meeting wasn't announced until Monday -- and less then 72 hours mandated by the Brown Act and without a majority of the board voting that it was an emergency. Plus, Koltermann and Bendis apparently wrote it together, which sounds like a serial meeting.)

Bendis and Koltermann also compained about the audience decorum, saying they would like to see "role models for conduct that supports [sic] decorum and affirmatively demonstrates respect for all."

Bendis should know, as has been faithfully reported at the Santa Clara Weekly. When it comes to affirmative demonstrations of respect for all, Bendis is the how-not-to-do-it exemplar.

At a July 30, 2012 meeting she remarked, "I'd be thrilled to know which of the many groups that were solicted widely was the group in which Pat Flot was the only person who decided she wanted to serve!"

At the same meeting she also told acting chair Albert Gonzalez -- the sole Latino on the board -- that "maybe the chair [Gonzalez] would like to go out and get himself a copy of Robert's Rules,"adding that reading it required no more than a tenth grade reading level.

In March 2012 Bendis accused trustee Elise DeYoung of perjury and/or stupidity - take your pick. "She unwittingly allowed herself to be manipulated by city officials," said Bendis. "Ms. DeYoung signed two letters she knew would be conveyed with false information," and further accused the board of "secretly colluding with an adversarial party" -- i.e. the City of Santa Clara.

In 2009 she was reportedly overheard at a public event telling a congressional aid that "A mentally challenged 9th grader could do your job better."

And that's not even talking about employee harassment complaints that were filed against the district because of her and the ensuing censure by her colleagues.

Still, board meetings ought to be conducted in rooms where everyone can fit. But until recently, SCUSD's board meetings rarely drew standing room-only audiences -- something that no doubt worked to Bendis' benefit. Now that she has the spotlight, she may soon be pining for the good old days.

Here's the entire memo:

TO: Dr. Bobbie Plough, Superintendent

FROM: Dr. Christine E. Koltermann, SCUSD Board President

PREPARED BY: Dr. Christine E. Koltermann, SCUSD Board President

                               Dr. Ina K. Bendis, SCUSD Trustee

SUBMITTED: December 16, 2012

MEETING DATE: December 18, 2012 (Special Meeting) 

TITLE: Approval for the SCUSD Board of Education to initiate a process

to improve access to Board Meetings by all members of the public.

ADMINISTRATIVE SUBMISSION

The Board President has received complaints that the December 13, 2012

Regular Meeting of the SCUSD Board of Education was not equally

accessible to members of the public, including members of protected

classes. The following is a non-exhaustive list of the kinds of

complaints received.

[1] Seating in the district Board room was almost exclusively reserved

by staff for other staff members, forcing parents and other community

members to stand in the lobby and the hall.

[2] The volume and clarity of the sound system available in the lobby

and hall was insufficient to enable mew~ers of the public who could not

enter the Board room to hear the proceedings;

[3] The background noise level in the lobby and hall due to private

conversations precluded even members of the public who stood within

what normally would have been hearing distance of the speakers, to hear

the proceedings;

[4] Disabled members of the public who could not stand for long periods

of time due to their disabilities, were unable to remain long enough to

listen to the Board's discussion and exercise their right to address

the Board on matters of interest to them, because they did not have

access to the seating they required due to their disabilities;

[5] Latino members of the public who lack proficiency in English, and

whose "protected class" ethnicity comprises more than 30% of District

residents, could not understand the proceedings or contribute their

input to the Board, regardless of whether they were among the fortunate

few non-employees to achieve seating within the Board room.

[6] The repeated outbreaks of applause, hand waving and spontaneous

oral outbreaks by District employees who'd obtained preferential access

to seating in the boardroom compared to members of the public who'd

been excluded from the boardroom due to "Reserved" signs on seats,

denied the physically-excluded individuals equal access to similarly

communicate their own support for views expressed by others, outside of

the time reserved for public comment and, in addition, may have

violated Govt. Code 54957.9 and SCUSD Policy 7370. In addition to this

specific civil rights concern, the refusal of those engaging in this

conduct to cease it when requested by the Board President also

subverted the purpose of Board Policies designed to encourage parent

and community participation at Board meetings; enable the Board's

access to all points of view without minority view-holders' fear of

intimidation or embarrassment; and provide students with Employee role

models for conduct that supports decorum and affirmatively demonstrates

respect for all.

RECOMMENDATION:

The board will take action to initiate a process through which SCUSD

will ensure equal access to all individuals who wish to attend our

Board meetings, with particular attention to ensuring the civil rights

of all Constitutionally-protected classes, to creating an atmosphere of

decorum conducive to the Board carrying out its business as efficiently

as possible; and to proactively avoid an atmosphere that would tend to

suppress expression of minority views. Unless the Board chooses an

alternative approach, the President will appoint a three-Trustee task

force charged with researching the constitutional issues in play;

inviting/receiving input from parents, community members, employees,

bargaining units, and other stakeholders; and formulating an action

plan to ensure civil rights protection, for presentation to the Board

at a later meeting.