Awhile back, former board member and Jim Robinson supporter Warren Beeson wrote a guest editorial to the Lebanon Express about the recall efforts expounding the rationale behind it. I have reporduced the list here with some editorial changes [in boxed parenthesis] indicating the way many people believe would be a more honest interpretation of the situation
€ [Jim Robinson] has a long-term pattern of rash and irresponsible actions that violate School Board policies, violate contracts, are potential conflicts of interest, and bring potential financial penalties to the district.
€ Alexander & Wineteer have consistently placed their personal agendas [of honest leadership and fairness to those who work in the district schools, including the charter school, with and for our communities kids] above the interests of the district regarding Sandridge Charter School and PIE; such as [discussing an] increase funding to Sandridge when all other district schools are facing budget cuts [and then making the necessary changes so that there would not be a negative financial impact and voting on that revised contract.]
€ [Jim Robinson] has acted in reckless disregard of legal advice and/or refused to obtain legal counsel, such as by [violating bargaining laws, violating civil rights of employees, exposing students and staff to asbestos, violating federal special ed and testing laws] (in fact, [working in coordination with] the School District's attorney [without the input of the board.]
€ Alexander and Wineteer have consistently made last-minute changes to board meeting agendas in order to spring surprise proposals on the other board members, the administration, and the interested public [Because Chair Sherrie Sprenger refused to put items they requested on the agenda].
€ [Jim Robinson] has cost the district thousands of dollars in unnecessary legal expenses with hasty, ill-considered, reckless, and irresponsible actions. [The majority of the Board was not]violating the superintendent's contract by putting him on administrative leave, [however, reversing the decision due to harassment] is one example [of the undue pressure brought against the public servants trying to do what is best for students].
€ They have [tried to stop] numerous administrative and personnel actions [that wer expensivew and detrimental to the district and have been unable to stop Jim Robinson's] violations of board policy and existing contracts, leaving the district subject to litigation; for example, by [illegal] negotiations [with employees and they have tried to work out a fair] contract renewal with PIE outside the established process [since Jim Robinson refused to treat the Sand Ridge group appropriately and ignored the desire of the board in the negotiations].
€ [Jim Robinson's] agenda of [chaos] prevents the community from moving forward to achieve better educational opportunities for all Lebanon students.These actions (and their potential future decisions) have serious legal and financial consequences for which Lebanon residents will pay the price.
It is up to the citizens of Lebanon to decide which version is more accurate...
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Reponding to this and that...
I am glad to offer a forum for debate... I will also (as Dennis stated) retract when wrong and fix when necessary...however, to date, I do not feel any content here requires either action since the arguments coming forward are full of the same rhetoric that Mr. Robinson has been feeding the community for years...
First, Dennis, I place you in the same category as your mother for one reason, and one reason only.... both of you "attack" (my choice of word) people you have not had conversations with. I know both of you and am in fact on a first name basis with both of you and have found this fact to be true. That is why I was disappointed to see your webpage following the same sort of hearsay model as your mother's writings.
Second.... the money that comes from the government CAN, I repeat, CAN be used to purchase classroom teachers if the district will guarantee small class sizes. Mr. Robinson refuses to do that, so therefore, the commentor is correct... in that case, using the money to purchase teachers would be illegal.
Also.... the TOSA issue... take three... They can only help some, and there is no guarantee that those who need it will get it.... while smaller class size would help everyone.
And, just a tag.... there are some teachers out there who have cushy positions and favorite classes and programs because they have supported Mr. Robinson and the district programs, even though they are considered by many of their peers as inappropriate choices for those classes and programs due to their lesser educational skills than some peers who have "rocked the boat" and are now being retaliated against in the district's attempts to get them to be quiet or resign or retire.
First, Dennis, I place you in the same category as your mother for one reason, and one reason only.... both of you "attack" (my choice of word) people you have not had conversations with. I know both of you and am in fact on a first name basis with both of you and have found this fact to be true. That is why I was disappointed to see your webpage following the same sort of hearsay model as your mother's writings.
Second.... the money that comes from the government CAN, I repeat, CAN be used to purchase classroom teachers if the district will guarantee small class sizes. Mr. Robinson refuses to do that, so therefore, the commentor is correct... in that case, using the money to purchase teachers would be illegal.
Also.... the TOSA issue... take three... They can only help some, and there is no guarantee that those who need it will get it.... while smaller class size would help everyone.
And, just a tag.... there are some teachers out there who have cushy positions and favorite classes and programs because they have supported Mr. Robinson and the district programs, even though they are considered by many of their peers as inappropriate choices for those classes and programs due to their lesser educational skills than some peers who have "rocked the boat" and are now being retaliated against in the district's attempts to get them to be quiet or resign or retire.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Fear and Retaliation in Lebanon #2
Well, the Jim Robinson supporters are in fine form yet again...
AK Dugan (potentially yellow journalism's newest convert) and her son Dennis continue to feed the fear of the uninformed citizens of Lebanon with the newest attacks on those who are fighting against this recall.
They are trying to make the good citizens of Lebanon believe several things about those that are against the recall...
1. It is organized...
2. It is expensive...
3. Mr. Wineteer and Mr. Alexander have "received monies" that should be reported.
4. and supposedly...the actions are illegal.
As I see it, there are a few minor details they have ignored...
1. There are many different kinds of signs and messages out there.... Some are obviously stenciled and others are obviously hand painted. Some have one tone, some have another.
2. It is amusing that the "yes" side seems to believe that every thing has to be store bought or professionally manufactured. Apparently, a lot of people on the NO Recall side appear to have talents (such as painting) and left over items (such as paint and wood) that the other side does not possess.
Let's figure the cost of one the signs.....
-old sign from previous election..... free
-paint left over from your trim.... free
-nails left over from you last project.... free
-friends to help you put it in your yard.... free
Telling the world that you are against the tyranny of a small group of special interest people..... PRICELESS.
3. Unless we are going to say that Senators Obama and McCain should report the monies received from the citizens of Lebanon for the signs that we have placed here in our yards, there is no way you can blame elected officials for the free speech of individuals.
4. There is nothing to indicate that these people have done anything illegal; however, can anyone tell me... is placing personal message signs for elections on city and county land illegal? If so, then the "yes" people have crossed the line...
Overall...
It seems to me that these other people might just be jealous that their opposition does not have to create multiple PACs to shelter their secret society, pay signature gathers, shell out money for mailings, coerce people to support them nor threaten anyone to garner votes.
What the many individual citizens on the NO on the recall side are doing doesn't have to be against the law.... however, people usually accuse others of things that they themselves do... so maybe there is a subliminal message to be had here.
AK Dugan (potentially yellow journalism's newest convert) and her son Dennis continue to feed the fear of the uninformed citizens of Lebanon with the newest attacks on those who are fighting against this recall.
They are trying to make the good citizens of Lebanon believe several things about those that are against the recall...
1. It is organized...
2. It is expensive...
3. Mr. Wineteer and Mr. Alexander have "received monies" that should be reported.
4. and supposedly...the actions are illegal.
As I see it, there are a few minor details they have ignored...
1. There are many different kinds of signs and messages out there.... Some are obviously stenciled and others are obviously hand painted. Some have one tone, some have another.
2. It is amusing that the "yes" side seems to believe that every thing has to be store bought or professionally manufactured. Apparently, a lot of people on the NO Recall side appear to have talents (such as painting) and left over items (such as paint and wood) that the other side does not possess.
Let's figure the cost of one the signs.....
-old sign from previous election..... free
-paint left over from your trim.... free
-nails left over from you last project.... free
-friends to help you put it in your yard.... free
Telling the world that you are against the tyranny of a small group of special interest people..... PRICELESS.
3. Unless we are going to say that Senators Obama and McCain should report the monies received from the citizens of Lebanon for the signs that we have placed here in our yards, there is no way you can blame elected officials for the free speech of individuals.
4. There is nothing to indicate that these people have done anything illegal; however, can anyone tell me... is placing personal message signs for elections on city and county land illegal? If so, then the "yes" people have crossed the line...
Overall...
It seems to me that these other people might just be jealous that their opposition does not have to create multiple PACs to shelter their secret society, pay signature gathers, shell out money for mailings, coerce people to support them nor threaten anyone to garner votes.
What the many individual citizens on the NO on the recall side are doing doesn't have to be against the law.... however, people usually accuse others of things that they themselves do... so maybe there is a subliminal message to be had here.
Can we afford more teachers?
I enjoy a good debate and some of the comments here have encouraged some great discussions. The most recent comment talks about the value of the TOSAs (Teachers on Special Assignment) and affirms that the community would support another bond if it were for teachers...
There are not enough TOSAs to make a serious impact on the district....they can only help so many, and the commentor was correct, there are many teachers who do need the help, but unless administration identifies that fact and requires it, most of those who "need it most" will never ask for it.
In my opinion, we could add more teaching staff easily with current funds (even considering the 2.9 million dollar deficeit we have incurred under Mr. Robinson's leadership - which I state as a fact because the loss of students and the loss of money have a statistically significant correlation...) if Mr. Robinson were willing to re-allocate funds away from administration and new programs (on top of old programs) and toward the hiring of more teachers.
But, I hear you protesting, he did cut us by 1 whole administrator at the high school!
You need to go back further in the memory of the district to see the real change. We used to have 6 directors district-wide. The assistant Superintendent had 1 full time secretary. The high school had 1 principal and 2 vice principals (cheaper than "administrators") and 1 half time Activities Director/ half time vice principal.
If you go back even further... we had close to ninety teachers at the high school alone...(now 64 more or less)...we had PE and Music in EVERY elementary school. We had middle school sports. We had an alternative high school here in Lebanon.
What we have lost is almost unfathomable... and yet... we continue to take from the buildings and add to the district office and its new programs...and the fact is that this community will not support a new bond as long as Mr. Robinson is managing the money and the allocation of funds.
There are not enough TOSAs to make a serious impact on the district....they can only help so many, and the commentor was correct, there are many teachers who do need the help, but unless administration identifies that fact and requires it, most of those who "need it most" will never ask for it.
In my opinion, we could add more teaching staff easily with current funds (even considering the 2.9 million dollar deficeit we have incurred under Mr. Robinson's leadership - which I state as a fact because the loss of students and the loss of money have a statistically significant correlation...) if Mr. Robinson were willing to re-allocate funds away from administration and new programs (on top of old programs) and toward the hiring of more teachers.
But, I hear you protesting, he did cut us by 1 whole administrator at the high school!
You need to go back further in the memory of the district to see the real change. We used to have 6 directors district-wide. The assistant Superintendent had 1 full time secretary. The high school had 1 principal and 2 vice principals (cheaper than "administrators") and 1 half time Activities Director/ half time vice principal.
If you go back even further... we had close to ninety teachers at the high school alone...(now 64 more or less)...we had PE and Music in EVERY elementary school. We had middle school sports. We had an alternative high school here in Lebanon.
What we have lost is almost unfathomable... and yet... we continue to take from the buildings and add to the district office and its new programs...and the fact is that this community will not support a new bond as long as Mr. Robinson is managing the money and the allocation of funds.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
What are the non-classroom teachers "teaching"?
The title is a question posted on this blog...
Here is my answer (to the best of my abilities since I am not one of them and know only what I have seen and heard from reliable sources)....
Some of the TOSAs (Teachers On Special Assignment) are "literacy coaches" who train their peers in effective reading strategies for them to use with their students.... some actually work with students as well.
Some are "peer coaches" who are supposed to watch their peers and give feedback to them.
Some are math specialists who work district wide training teachers in good math strategies.
Some work on different district programs creating staff development presentations or other trainings.
All of them are teachers who had good reputations in the classroom.
The problem is that, apparently, the trainings and staff development are a "scatter shoot" approach that many teachers resent and therefore do not benefit from them.
Also, the class size issue begs the question...yet again.... which would truly help our students more?
From what I have heard from teachers all the way from Kindergarten to the High School, there are more people who wonder what these TOSAs are doing, than those who know and value it...
Here is my answer (to the best of my abilities since I am not one of them and know only what I have seen and heard from reliable sources)....
Some of the TOSAs (Teachers On Special Assignment) are "literacy coaches" who train their peers in effective reading strategies for them to use with their students.... some actually work with students as well.
Some are "peer coaches" who are supposed to watch their peers and give feedback to them.
Some are math specialists who work district wide training teachers in good math strategies.
Some work on different district programs creating staff development presentations or other trainings.
All of them are teachers who had good reputations in the classroom.
The problem is that, apparently, the trainings and staff development are a "scatter shoot" approach that many teachers resent and therefore do not benefit from them.
Also, the class size issue begs the question...yet again.... which would truly help our students more?
From what I have heard from teachers all the way from Kindergarten to the High School, there are more people who wonder what these TOSAs are doing, than those who know and value it...
Friday, September 26, 2008
The non-classroom teacher issue....
I received a comment that was concerned about the message sent by my list of teachers not in the classroom. Very specifically they spoke about Debbie Price (who is an excellent teacher) doing some teaching of their kids and the possibility that the others are teaching as well.
There are some that are "teaching" and there are others who have to create new programs and things to do in order to be viable and keep their position. More than one of the special "teacher on assignment" people on the Student Acheivement team has expressed concern at the lack of clarity in their positions as well as the need to "create a reason" for them to be doing things.
The larger concern... which is more important? Smaller class sizes district-wide by having every available person in the classroom, or having a few specialists that are used to back-up rhetoric on a failing system.
These are all good teachers...but where would they make the most impact?
There are some that are "teaching" and there are others who have to create new programs and things to do in order to be viable and keep their position. More than one of the special "teacher on assignment" people on the Student Acheivement team has expressed concern at the lack of clarity in their positions as well as the need to "create a reason" for them to be doing things.
The larger concern... which is more important? Smaller class sizes district-wide by having every available person in the classroom, or having a few specialists that are used to back-up rhetoric on a failing system.
These are all good teachers...but where would they make the most impact?
Thursday, September 25, 2008
The message fit me to a "tee"...
It was a pleasant surprise to run in for a few items from the Safeway this afternoon and see several people sporting messages against the recall!
Those who have been hiding in fear of retaliation and abuse are finally returning to the light.
It reminds me of the scenes in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe where Christmas is coming and then the winter is melting and the people are coming out from hibernation to celebrate the loss of power of the evil Snow Queen.
And yet, it is scary to know that there is still a small but tenacious group of people clinging to a delusion about a man whose true colors have been exposed over and over and over...
You wonder when you know that these are people who usually are quite level-headed and, pre-Jim Robinson, commanded a lot of respect in this community, how is it that they could be so deceived for so long....
It makes me wonder.... what is the magic ingredient in Mr. Robinson's Kool-Aid?
Those who have been hiding in fear of retaliation and abuse are finally returning to the light.
It reminds me of the scenes in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe where Christmas is coming and then the winter is melting and the people are coming out from hibernation to celebrate the loss of power of the evil Snow Queen.
And yet, it is scary to know that there is still a small but tenacious group of people clinging to a delusion about a man whose true colors have been exposed over and over and over...
You wonder when you know that these are people who usually are quite level-headed and, pre-Jim Robinson, commanded a lot of respect in this community, how is it that they could be so deceived for so long....
It makes me wonder.... what is the magic ingredient in Mr. Robinson's Kool-Aid?
Other local politics....
It is hard not to notice that the large "yes" on the recall sign out on Denny School Rd. and Hwy 34 is accompanied by a sign in support of Sherrie Sprenger...
This should not surprise anyone.
As we vote for a representative this year, I am encouraging all of my fellow constituents to vote for anyone but Ms. Sprenger for some very specific and logical reasons...see if you agree....
1. Ms. Sprenger was NOT elected to her position, she was appointed (so don't think of her as an "incumbent").
2. I believe that she sought endorsement from the teacher's union when she ran for school board...and boy didn't that turn out great for them?
3. She has received money from one of those small special interest groups that are in collusion on the recall.
4. When a board member, she was easily seduced by the charasmatic Mr. Robinson and shut out parents, teachers, and community members.
5. She allowed our schools to deteriorate to the level of "public embarassment across the state".
Do we really want someone like that "representing" us at the state level?
This should not surprise anyone.
As we vote for a representative this year, I am encouraging all of my fellow constituents to vote for anyone but Ms. Sprenger for some very specific and logical reasons...see if you agree....
1. Ms. Sprenger was NOT elected to her position, she was appointed (so don't think of her as an "incumbent").
2. I believe that she sought endorsement from the teacher's union when she ran for school board...and boy didn't that turn out great for them?
3. She has received money from one of those small special interest groups that are in collusion on the recall.
4. When a board member, she was easily seduced by the charasmatic Mr. Robinson and shut out parents, teachers, and community members.
5. She allowed our schools to deteriorate to the level of "public embarassment across the state".
Do we really want someone like that "representing" us at the state level?
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
More facts....
For those of you who don't peruse the comments, I am repeating a reecent comment here in this post. My goal has always been to provide proof for people to research.
Thank you for the comments!
"To check out who owns certain properties in Linn County, go to www.co.linn.or.us. Click under Depts/Services and then choose Assessor. You can then search by anyone's name or specific address under account detail. This gives details on every property in Linn County. It has some great info!"
Thank you for the comments!
"To check out who owns certain properties in Linn County, go to www.co.linn.or.us. Click under Depts/Services and then choose Assessor. You can then search by anyone's name or specific address under account detail. This gives details on every property in Linn County. It has some great info!"
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
What is up with the district office?
There is apparently a lot of nervous activity at the district office recently...the question is, where all the nervousness is coming from.
Some people think it is just relative to the people who are afraid that new leadership might 1. decrease the number of people working outside of the classroom, and 2. realign staffing for more financial efficiency to free up more money for the schools. While this is almost a given (as soon as a logical person) has control over the district, there might be other reasons for district employee nerves...
Some people have suspected for years that there might be money issues that are difficult to explain...
Others think that maybe the potential Special Ed violations have finally caught up with someone...
And some also believe that the rumor of funny numbers for testing may finally have reached high-up ears...
Whatever it is, it sure has caused a ripple.....and considering the great job that Mr. Robinson has done of insulating himself with human shields, the only question left is, "Who will take the fall?"
Some people think it is just relative to the people who are afraid that new leadership might 1. decrease the number of people working outside of the classroom, and 2. realign staffing for more financial efficiency to free up more money for the schools. While this is almost a given (as soon as a logical person) has control over the district, there might be other reasons for district employee nerves...
Some people have suspected for years that there might be money issues that are difficult to explain...
Others think that maybe the potential Special Ed violations have finally caught up with someone...
And some also believe that the rumor of funny numbers for testing may finally have reached high-up ears...
Whatever it is, it sure has caused a ripple.....and considering the great job that Mr. Robinson has done of insulating himself with human shields, the only question left is, "Who will take the fall?"
Monday, September 22, 2008
Rumor and Rationale #3
Rumor has it that Linda Darling is the owner of the piece of land on the corner of Hwy 34 and Denny School Road that is currently sporting a sign supporting the recall.
Why would she be in support of the recall?
Oh yes, Ms. Darling is one of the people this blogger noted earlier that has benefitted from being a staunch Jim Robinson supporter.
I know many people wish they could land a job as a Director of finances in a multi-million dollar budget enterprise with a simple Bachelors Degree. It just goes to show, it's not what you know, but who.
Why would she be in support of the recall?
Oh yes, Ms. Darling is one of the people this blogger noted earlier that has benefitted from being a staunch Jim Robinson supporter.
I know many people wish they could land a job as a Director of finances in a multi-million dollar budget enterprise with a simple Bachelors Degree. It just goes to show, it's not what you know, but who.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
The bigger they are...
We are all familiar with the concept, "the bigger they are the harder they fall."
Well brace yourselves.... The concept of Mr. Robinson is much bigger than the role that he plays.
For years this community has been held hostage by a controlling interloper who was able to schmooze his way into the hearts and minds of some of the pivitol community leaders.
Make no mistake, Mr. Robinson is a very smart man. He probably did his homework to such an extent that he would know which church to attend, which insurance agent to choose, which clubs to attend, which stores to shop in and which neighborhood to inhabit in order to meet the people he would need to win over in order to provide a buffer for himself and his unorthodox leadership style that he had tried to implement and failed in two prior communities.
When he goes, the ripple effect and the aftershocks will be intense and painful...but the alternative is much more dangerous.
So, as I said, brace yourselves....
Well brace yourselves.... The concept of Mr. Robinson is much bigger than the role that he plays.
For years this community has been held hostage by a controlling interloper who was able to schmooze his way into the hearts and minds of some of the pivitol community leaders.
Make no mistake, Mr. Robinson is a very smart man. He probably did his homework to such an extent that he would know which church to attend, which insurance agent to choose, which clubs to attend, which stores to shop in and which neighborhood to inhabit in order to meet the people he would need to win over in order to provide a buffer for himself and his unorthodox leadership style that he had tried to implement and failed in two prior communities.
When he goes, the ripple effect and the aftershocks will be intense and painful...but the alternative is much more dangerous.
So, as I said, brace yourselves....
Saturday, September 20, 2008
What's your "sign"?
Hopefully you have all noticed a few new things to look at as you drive around Lebanon....
After the discouragement I expressed in my last posting.... I decided to drag myself out for some errands and my mood lifted significantly!
All I can say is....
Thank you, thank you, thank you!...to whoever took the time and energy to demonstrate that Mr. Wineteer and Mr. Alexander are not alone!
For a while people have been trying to convince us that this community is divided, but that image is faulty in that it implies equal division....
I think the closer to accurate view of this as a community is that it has a gaping wound, but the majority of the body is healthy and well and just waiting to get rid of the infection and heal the sore spot.
Let's keep the brave healers and allow them to do what is needed to cure this community!
After the discouragement I expressed in my last posting.... I decided to drag myself out for some errands and my mood lifted significantly!
All I can say is....
Thank you, thank you, thank you!...to whoever took the time and energy to demonstrate that Mr. Wineteer and Mr. Alexander are not alone!
For a while people have been trying to convince us that this community is divided, but that image is faulty in that it implies equal division....
I think the closer to accurate view of this as a community is that it has a gaping wound, but the majority of the body is healthy and well and just waiting to get rid of the infection and heal the sore spot.
Let's keep the brave healers and allow them to do what is needed to cure this community!
What a shame...
I find it discouraging to know that so many people have bought in to the long standing presupposition that Mr. Alexander and Mr. Wineteer being on the board is a problem just because Jim Robinson has painted them in a negative light....
Truly, what have they done to deserve to be removed unceremoniously from the board....
They have questioned administrative decisions.
They have complained about administrative actions.
They have refused to back down to bullying and harassment.
They have tried valiantly for years to remove Jim Robinson from the almost unlimited power he was given by prior board members.
They have tried to stop the sale of Lebanon school buildings.
They have tried to reinstate alternative education in Lebanon.
They have tried to meet with teachers and parents to see what they can do to help.
They have answered phone calls and met with anyone who has asked them to discuss concerns.
In short, they have done everything they can to not be yes-men who bow down to the intimidation tactics of a tyrannical leader.
I think they deserve the opportunity to finish what they started.
Truly, what have they done to deserve to be removed unceremoniously from the board....
They have questioned administrative decisions.
They have complained about administrative actions.
They have refused to back down to bullying and harassment.
They have tried valiantly for years to remove Jim Robinson from the almost unlimited power he was given by prior board members.
They have tried to stop the sale of Lebanon school buildings.
They have tried to reinstate alternative education in Lebanon.
They have tried to meet with teachers and parents to see what they can do to help.
They have answered phone calls and met with anyone who has asked them to discuss concerns.
In short, they have done everything they can to not be yes-men who bow down to the intimidation tactics of a tyrannical leader.
I think they deserve the opportunity to finish what they started.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
About enrollment at LHS...
There was a comment made about making sure my numbers for enrollment at LHS were accurate...
Let me put it this way...
According to high school sources there are two kinds of Freshmen:
1. Those who have finished 8th grade and are ready to move up to the high school, these are called incoming freshmen.
2. Those who did not pass enough classes to have enough credits to move up to sophomore level, these are called repeaters and are not really freshmen.
Unfortunately, these same classifications occur for every grade and therefore no "enrollment" numbers are ever very clear.
What is a fact is that there were less than 300 "incoming freshmen" this year at LHS.
The 450 number was found by counting the number of highlighted students in a graduation requirements spreadsheet created by the district office in June of 2007. The highlighted students represented students who had been enrolled at LHS and no longer attended. According to the district office spreadsheet that number was over 450.
Let me put it this way...
According to high school sources there are two kinds of Freshmen:
1. Those who have finished 8th grade and are ready to move up to the high school, these are called incoming freshmen.
2. Those who did not pass enough classes to have enough credits to move up to sophomore level, these are called repeaters and are not really freshmen.
Unfortunately, these same classifications occur for every grade and therefore no "enrollment" numbers are ever very clear.
What is a fact is that there were less than 300 "incoming freshmen" this year at LHS.
The 450 number was found by counting the number of highlighted students in a graduation requirements spreadsheet created by the district office in June of 2007. The highlighted students represented students who had been enrolled at LHS and no longer attended. According to the district office spreadsheet that number was over 450.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
What matters...
There have been a few comments about whether identity should be revealed...
Here are my thoughts...
The identity matters less than the content.
This blogger has tried diligently to check facts before posting, spoken to multiple sources, researched web pages and clarified points as necessary.
The content on this page can be verified and determined by individuals who choose to look.
No one has been named who is not directly linked to actions or activities without sufficient evidence to the concept.
If you find my information faulty... let me know, I will recheck my facts, and if I am wrong, I will offer retractions.
So far, I believe my content withstands argument, therefore my identity is irrelevant.
Here are my thoughts...
The identity matters less than the content.
This blogger has tried diligently to check facts before posting, spoken to multiple sources, researched web pages and clarified points as necessary.
The content on this page can be verified and determined by individuals who choose to look.
No one has been named who is not directly linked to actions or activities without sufficient evidence to the concept.
If you find my information faulty... let me know, I will recheck my facts, and if I am wrong, I will offer retractions.
So far, I believe my content withstands argument, therefore my identity is irrelevant.
Disinformation continued...
Mr. Sweeney went on to describe those who intentionally try to mislead the public...
He called them Disinformationalists...
http://www.whale.to/b/sweeney.html
1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentatorbecome argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.
I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
Here is the first paragraph of the introduction to Mr. Sweeney's (at the time of the article) unpublished book, Fatal Rebirth. It seems appropriate.
"Truth cannot live on a diet of secrets, withering within entangled lies. Freedom cannot live on a diet of lies, surrendering to the veil of oppression. The human spirit cannot live on a diet of oppression, becoming subservient in the end to the will of evil. God, as truth incarnate, will not long let stand a world devoted to such evil. Therefore, let us have the truth and freedom our spirits require... or let us die seeking these things, for without them, we shall surely and justly perish in an evil world."
He called them Disinformationalists...
http://www.whale.to/b/sweeney.html
1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentatorbecome argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial. Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo. With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.
I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
Here is the first paragraph of the introduction to Mr. Sweeney's (at the time of the article) unpublished book, Fatal Rebirth. It seems appropriate.
"Truth cannot live on a diet of secrets, withering within entangled lies. Freedom cannot live on a diet of lies, surrendering to the veil of oppression. The human spirit cannot live on a diet of oppression, becoming subservient in the end to the will of evil. God, as truth incarnate, will not long let stand a world devoted to such evil. Therefore, let us have the truth and freedom our spirits require... or let us die seeking these things, for without them, we shall surely and justly perish in an evil world."
Disinformation in Lebanon
Back in the 1990s a writer came up with a theory about how people got away with covering up the truth... It turned into the piece,"Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation (Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist) by H. Michael Sweeney"
which can be found at http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html
It is interesting how many of the 25 activities delineated in this piece can be found in the situation in Lebanon from all sides of the issues.
What is more interesting is the alarming percentage has been coming from the District Office and the CARES group as a team.
Let's take a look at the steps...
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish.
So the question is, which of these actions have you experienced?
which can be found at http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html
It is interesting how many of the 25 activities delineated in this piece can be found in the situation in Lebanon from all sides of the issues.
What is more interesting is the alarming percentage has been coming from the District Office and the CARES group as a team.
Let's take a look at the steps...
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish.
So the question is, which of these actions have you experienced?
So which ones are not connected to CARES?
A comment on one of the DH Articles stated that this blogger should check his facts about who is involved with CARES.
Please believe me. I checked BEFORE I wrote.
But let me clarify for those who skim rather than read...
"So..... who CARES???? and who else is involved in all this PAC activity?" are the two questions that were asked in an earlier blog (see Theory #2 - Smoke and Mirrors)
"Who CARES?" is related to the members and supporters of the CARES group.
"Who else in involved in all this PAC activity?" relates to those who are directly connected to any one of the seven PACs.
Here is the rationale for those who have been named on this blog as either CARES or other PAC contributors, supporters (or received anything positive from those groups) that appear to be coordinating efforts and funds:
1. Michael Farnsworth is a treasurer of several of the PACS
2. Dave Benneth is a treasurer of several PACs and has spoken at board meetings as a representative for CARES.
3. Catherine Watts has spoken at board meetings as a representative for CARES
4. Jennifer Walter has spoken at board meetings as a representative for CARES and contributed money to the PAC.
5. Connie Schmidt and her company contributed money to the PAC.
6. Warren Beeson has made public statements of support and written letters relative to the CARES group and its work.
7. Dr. William Barish contributed money to the PAC.
8. Carol Chevernak is the director of a PAC
9. Lou and Kim Masog's family business and Mr. Masog personally contributed to PACs.
10. Sherrie Sprenger received funds from PACs and her recall effort was thwarted by a PAC.
11. Steve and Leigh Kelley have hosted CARES meetings and Ms. Kelley and her son recieved monies from the PACs for signiture gathering.
12. Joyce Weatherly has spoken at board meetings and publicly as a supporter and contributed money to the PAC.
13. John (Tre) Kennedy is the CARES PAC creator
14. Chris Fisher's recall effort was thwarted by a PAC.
15. Tom McHill's recall effort was thwarted by a PAC.
And I must reiterate my concern that such a small group has been able to dismantle the public forum that used to exist for dialog and debate with its fear and retaliation tactics.
Please believe me. I checked BEFORE I wrote.
But let me clarify for those who skim rather than read...
"So..... who CARES???? and who else is involved in all this PAC activity?" are the two questions that were asked in an earlier blog (see Theory #2 - Smoke and Mirrors)
"Who CARES?" is related to the members and supporters of the CARES group.
"Who else in involved in all this PAC activity?" relates to those who are directly connected to any one of the seven PACs.
Here is the rationale for those who have been named on this blog as either CARES or other PAC contributors, supporters (or received anything positive from those groups) that appear to be coordinating efforts and funds:
1. Michael Farnsworth is a treasurer of several of the PACS
2. Dave Benneth is a treasurer of several PACs and has spoken at board meetings as a representative for CARES.
3. Catherine Watts has spoken at board meetings as a representative for CARES
4. Jennifer Walter has spoken at board meetings as a representative for CARES and contributed money to the PAC.
5. Connie Schmidt and her company contributed money to the PAC.
6. Warren Beeson has made public statements of support and written letters relative to the CARES group and its work.
7. Dr. William Barish contributed money to the PAC.
8. Carol Chevernak is the director of a PAC
9. Lou and Kim Masog's family business and Mr. Masog personally contributed to PACs.
10. Sherrie Sprenger received funds from PACs and her recall effort was thwarted by a PAC.
11. Steve and Leigh Kelley have hosted CARES meetings and Ms. Kelley and her son recieved monies from the PACs for signiture gathering.
12. Joyce Weatherly has spoken at board meetings and publicly as a supporter and contributed money to the PAC.
13. John (Tre) Kennedy is the CARES PAC creator
14. Chris Fisher's recall effort was thwarted by a PAC.
15. Tom McHill's recall effort was thwarted by a PAC.
And I must reiterate my concern that such a small group has been able to dismantle the public forum that used to exist for dialog and debate with its fear and retaliation tactics.
But I digress...
Boy is it hard to stay focused on providing "proof" because there is so much inuendo and fodder for rumors in this situation... But I thought I might add a few links for people to be able to look at things for themselves.
Don't believe this blog just because you like or agree with the content.
Let's all be responsible and do some research so we can all say...
"I know for a fact."
1.Here is the district phone directory....see for yourself how many teachers, administrators, District Office personnel etc. that there are in our district.
http://www.lebanon.k12.or.us/telephone/telephone_2007-08.htm
2. The district rhetoric on the SAS and the other "priorities" here in Lebanon:
http://lebanon.or.schoolwebpages.com/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=5541
3. Oregon Department of Education 2007-08 Test Results for Reading, Writing, Math and Science article with links below to results.
You can also look around on this page to find older documents for comparison over the years.
http://www.ode.state.or.us/news/releases/default.aspx?yr=0000&kw=&rid=660#top
4. Where you can find the lawsuit results from the Employment Relations Board:
Scroll down to UP 033-04 for the Classified illegal bargaining case. and
Scroll down to UP 004-06 for the Certified free speech case.
http://www.oregon.gov/ERB/bdordlst.shtml
5. I could not find the asbetos complaint ruling from when they stripped the asbestos tiles with kids in the building on the OSHA webpage. If any of you come across it, I would love to post it. There was a fine imposed.
Let me know if there are other things you would like facts on.
Don't believe this blog just because you like or agree with the content.
Let's all be responsible and do some research so we can all say...
"I know for a fact."
1.Here is the district phone directory....see for yourself how many teachers, administrators, District Office personnel etc. that there are in our district.
http://www.lebanon.k12.or.us/telephone/telephone_2007-08.htm
2. The district rhetoric on the SAS and the other "priorities" here in Lebanon:
http://lebanon.or.schoolwebpages.com/education/components/scrapbook/default.php?sectiondetailid=5541
3. Oregon Department of Education 2007-08 Test Results for Reading, Writing, Math and Science article with links below to results.
You can also look around on this page to find older documents for comparison over the years.
http://www.ode.state.or.us/news/releases/default.aspx?yr=0000&kw=&rid=660#top
4. Where you can find the lawsuit results from the Employment Relations Board:
Scroll down to UP 033-04 for the Classified illegal bargaining case. and
Scroll down to UP 004-06 for the Certified free speech case.
http://www.oregon.gov/ERB/bdordlst.shtml
5. I could not find the asbetos complaint ruling from when they stripped the asbestos tiles with kids in the building on the OSHA webpage. If any of you come across it, I would love to post it. There was a fine imposed.
Let me know if there are other things you would like facts on.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Irreconciable differences...
The Albany Democrat Herald posted an article about the Board Meeting at 9:35 last night:
http://www.dhonline.com/articles/2008/09/16/news/local/6loc01_resign.txt
It seems to be a clear and concise piece of information that gives a lot of evidence to the current status of the situation:
The DH reports, "According to the statement, board members want the superintendent's resignation because 'the current working relationship is irreparable" between them and members are concerned about further harm to district and community morale.According to the statement, board members want the superintendent's resignation because "the current working relationship is irreparable' between them and members are concerned about further harm to district and community morale."
Later in the article Mr. Robinson is quoted as saying, ""I'm always prepared to work on my relationship with folks," he said. "I never consider any relationship to be irreparable."
This all reminds me of episodes on Divorce Court.
Couples arrive before the judge, they cite irreconcilable differences and then the battle begins...
Husbands and wives swear up and down that they are the ones who are willing to try to work it out after having pushed their spouse to the limit of human endurance. At some point, both sides give up all pretense...they stary filing restraining orders and lawsuits...
The insults fly, the accusations are hurled, backs are stabbed and at the end you have a bloody mess with parents who hate each other even more trying to work out visitation schedules and alimony.
The only difference here is that eventually Mr. Robinson will have to give up his rights to the children.
He will retire one day... he has talked about the fact that he is eligible now.
The question remains, is it about what is best for the kids?
If so, Mr. Robinson needs to acknowledge that a change to whatever "custody" in store is better for them than to remain in a contentious, legally tenuous situation.
The community wants custody of their kids back...
http://www.dhonline.com/articles/2008/09/16/news/local/6loc01_resign.txt
It seems to be a clear and concise piece of information that gives a lot of evidence to the current status of the situation:
The DH reports, "According to the statement, board members want the superintendent's resignation because 'the current working relationship is irreparable" between them and members are concerned about further harm to district and community morale.According to the statement, board members want the superintendent's resignation because "the current working relationship is irreparable' between them and members are concerned about further harm to district and community morale."
Later in the article Mr. Robinson is quoted as saying, ""I'm always prepared to work on my relationship with folks," he said. "I never consider any relationship to be irreparable."
This all reminds me of episodes on Divorce Court.
Couples arrive before the judge, they cite irreconcilable differences and then the battle begins...
Husbands and wives swear up and down that they are the ones who are willing to try to work it out after having pushed their spouse to the limit of human endurance. At some point, both sides give up all pretense...they stary filing restraining orders and lawsuits...
The insults fly, the accusations are hurled, backs are stabbed and at the end you have a bloody mess with parents who hate each other even more trying to work out visitation schedules and alimony.
The only difference here is that eventually Mr. Robinson will have to give up his rights to the children.
He will retire one day... he has talked about the fact that he is eligible now.
The question remains, is it about what is best for the kids?
If so, Mr. Robinson needs to acknowledge that a change to whatever "custody" in store is better for them than to remain in a contentious, legally tenuous situation.
The community wants custody of their kids back...
Monday, September 15, 2008
Will he go gracefully? Theories abound...
Well...
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink....
What will Jim Robinson's next move be? In the conversations that were to be had after the eventful one-item meeting this evening, theories were running rampant, but three themes kept reoccuring....
Theory A: Jim will resign with dignity accepting the unanimous vote as a sign that his time is up and he and the district need to part ways.
Theory B: Jim will put off meeting about it until the recall vote to see how the community really feels and then decide.
Theory C: Jim likes to win and he believes that the community would rather keep him than pay for a long protracted lawsuit. So he will push this to the end.
Any other theories out there?
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink....
What will Jim Robinson's next move be? In the conversations that were to be had after the eventful one-item meeting this evening, theories were running rampant, but three themes kept reoccuring....
Theory A: Jim will resign with dignity accepting the unanimous vote as a sign that his time is up and he and the district need to part ways.
Theory B: Jim will put off meeting about it until the recall vote to see how the community really feels and then decide.
Theory C: Jim likes to win and he believes that the community would rather keep him than pay for a long protracted lawsuit. So he will push this to the end.
Any other theories out there?
Are you in the know?
If you did not receive phone calls or text messages this evening, you may not be in the know...
The Lebanon School Board apparently voted this evening in a unanimous 5 to 0 vote to bargain a resignation with the superintendent.
The Lebanon School Board apparently voted this evening in a unanimous 5 to 0 vote to bargain a resignation with the superintendent.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Why fight the recall? ...A recap
1. Every other board member (aside from the new member) has been supported by or financially benefitted from the 7 PACs run by the small group trying to hijack the community.
2. They are not: yes-men, rubber stamps, puppets nor pawns.
3. They listen to anyone who wants to speak to them.
4. They are willing to engage in dialog and debate on any topic that is important to the community.
5. They have served tirelessly as defensive shields for the students, parents and staff of Lebanon schools to the best of their abilities. (For no compensation and admidst slanderous attacks.)
6. They stand up to Jim Robinson and district staff and ask for truth and honest data. (Although more often than not, the information is incomplete, not forthcoming, and in some cases, blatantly misleading.)
7. No one in their right mind would stay in there for this long under the barage of attacks unless they were not convinced that they were doing the right thing.
8. AND Finally - They represent the majority of the community, not a vocal, abusive minority.
2. They are not: yes-men, rubber stamps, puppets nor pawns.
3. They listen to anyone who wants to speak to them.
4. They are willing to engage in dialog and debate on any topic that is important to the community.
5. They have served tirelessly as defensive shields for the students, parents and staff of Lebanon schools to the best of their abilities. (For no compensation and admidst slanderous attacks.)
6. They stand up to Jim Robinson and district staff and ask for truth and honest data. (Although more often than not, the information is incomplete, not forthcoming, and in some cases, blatantly misleading.)
7. No one in their right mind would stay in there for this long under the barage of attacks unless they were not convinced that they were doing the right thing.
8. AND Finally - They represent the majority of the community, not a vocal, abusive minority.
Should he stay or should he go...
If you look at the Board policy of the Lebanon Community School District, Code: CBRelative to the Superintendent it states in its entirety..
"The superintendent is the district's chief executive officer and has, under the Board's direction, general supervision of all district schools, personnel and departments. The superintendent is responsible for managing the schools under the Board's policies and is accountable to the Board for that management.
The superintendent may delegate to other district personnel any powers and duties imposed upon the superintendent by Board policies or by vote of the Board. Delegation of power or duty, however, will not relieve the superintendent of responsibility for action taken under such delegation."
Somewhere along the line, Mr. Robinson has crafted an interesting contract that would appear almost iron clad to the casual observer. It requires that he be physically renewed on three separate occasions during three different years in order to actually be non-renewed. It gives him unlimited power to manage staff and programs.
It has gone through a series of changes since he was hired, here are a couple of favorites....
1. One year the district did NOT pay his PERS, the next year the word "Not" was removed increasing his salary by 6% on top of the regular pay raise cost of living he got.
2. He convinced the board to let him live outside of the city and changed the contract to reflect it.
HOWEVER..... all is not lost.... There is one key word in the contract that makes all the difference. The superintendent can be fired outright with no buy out if the Board believes that there is enough "CAUSE" for a judge to uphold dismissal.
Apparently, the board knows they have cause, but Mr. Robinson has already told people that he has about 50K set aside just to launch a legal attack against dismissal and therefore the Board is concerned about the cost of a prolonged, protracted legal battle for the district.
I guess my thought is that the return of 500 or so students to the district would more than cover the cost of the legal proceedings...
"The superintendent is the district's chief executive officer and has, under the Board's direction, general supervision of all district schools, personnel and departments. The superintendent is responsible for managing the schools under the Board's policies and is accountable to the Board for that management.
The superintendent may delegate to other district personnel any powers and duties imposed upon the superintendent by Board policies or by vote of the Board. Delegation of power or duty, however, will not relieve the superintendent of responsibility for action taken under such delegation."
Somewhere along the line, Mr. Robinson has crafted an interesting contract that would appear almost iron clad to the casual observer. It requires that he be physically renewed on three separate occasions during three different years in order to actually be non-renewed. It gives him unlimited power to manage staff and programs.
It has gone through a series of changes since he was hired, here are a couple of favorites....
1. One year the district did NOT pay his PERS, the next year the word "Not" was removed increasing his salary by 6% on top of the regular pay raise cost of living he got.
2. He convinced the board to let him live outside of the city and changed the contract to reflect it.
HOWEVER..... all is not lost.... There is one key word in the contract that makes all the difference. The superintendent can be fired outright with no buy out if the Board believes that there is enough "CAUSE" for a judge to uphold dismissal.
Apparently, the board knows they have cause, but Mr. Robinson has already told people that he has about 50K set aside just to launch a legal attack against dismissal and therefore the Board is concerned about the cost of a prolonged, protracted legal battle for the district.
I guess my thought is that the return of 500 or so students to the district would more than cover the cost of the legal proceedings...
Who are the victims du jour?
Well the other blogger has yet again turned on a person who has spoken out...(don't forget my earlier entry about retaliation such as this being the modus operandi of this small group trying to run Lebanon)...
Today's main course for the other blogger?
A parent, of all people, whose child was shafted at Lebanon High School. She wants to know why.
However, because the only strategy this administration knows for communication appears to be "divide and conquer" anyone who resists is deemed a problem and should watch out... they too will soon be negatively "blogged."
Don't worry Ma'am, you are in good company!
Many of the best people I have ever met are vicitims of the cyberbully and the intimidation of the district administration.
Today's main course for the other blogger?
A parent, of all people, whose child was shafted at Lebanon High School. She wants to know why.
However, because the only strategy this administration knows for communication appears to be "divide and conquer" anyone who resists is deemed a problem and should watch out... they too will soon be negatively "blogged."
Don't worry Ma'am, you are in good company!
Many of the best people I have ever met are vicitims of the cyberbully and the intimidation of the district administration.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Just a quick comparison...
Do we have too many administrators? Judge for yourself....
The School Directory for the state of Oregon can be found here:
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=1495
The Directory includes information such as number of students and a list of important people in the district. The names for the Canby District are from the ODE phone list, the names for the others are found on the district websites for each district.
CANBY School District - Total Number of Students - 5044
1. Superintendent Deborah Sommer
2. Business Manager David Moore
3. Human Resources/Personnel Hank Harris
4. Curriculum and Assessment - Mary Hochstetler
5. Special Education Sondra Strong
6. Technology Joe Morelock
7. Safety/Facilities Wayne Layman
Greater Albany Public Schools - Total number of students -8949
http://albany.k12.or.us/
1. Superintendent: maria.delapoer@albany.k12.or.us
2. Assistant Superintendent: Steve Kunke steve.kunke@albany.k12.or.us
3. Director of Business and Operations: Russell Allen russ.allen@albany.k12.or.us
4. Director of Special Programs,Ryan Mattingly ryan.mattingly@albany.k12.or.us
5. Director of Human Resources: Randy Lary randy.lary@albany.k12.or.us
6. Director of Curriculum & Instruction: Diane Smith diane.smith@albany.k12.or.us
7. Director of Facilities: Jim McGowan jim.mcgowan@albany.k12.or.us Special Programs
Salem-Keizer School District - Total number of students - 39469
http://www.salkeiz.k12.or.us/
1. Superintendent: Sandy Husk (e-mail: husk_sandy@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
2. Deputy Superintendent: Glenn Gelbrich (e-mail: gelbrich_glenn@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
3. Chief Operations Officer: Rich Goward (e-mail: goward_richard@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
Director of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment : John Weeks (e-mail: weeks_john@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
4. Director of Elementary Education: Steve Larson (e-mail: larson_steve@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
5. Director of Facilities: Luis Caraballo (e-mail: caraballo_luis@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
6. Director of Human Resources: Mary Cadez (e-mail: cadez_mary@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
7. Director of Student Services: Ruth Gelbrich (e-mail: gelbrich_ruth@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
8. Director of Technology: John Cuddy (e-mail: cuddy_john@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
9. Director of Community Relations and Communications: Jay Remy (e-mail: remy_jay@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
10. Director of Bilingual Services and Compensatory Education: David Bautista (e-mail: bautista_david@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
Lebanon Community School District - Total number of students - 4336
http://www.lebanon.k12.or.us/
1. Superintendent - Jim Robinson 451-8511 ex.224
2. Assistant Superintendent - Steve Kelley 451-8511 ex. 223
3. Director of Business - Linda Darling ex.233
4. Administrator of Special Education Programs Laurie Glazener ex. 236
5. Director of Nutrition Services - Pam Lessley ex. 237
6. Director of Operations - Larry Tilford 259-8911 1110
7. Director of Student Achievement - Jan Zarate ex. 270
8. Director of Technology Services Brian Bray 259-8993 1008
9. Transportation - Maggie Estes -259-8931 1131
Another Interesting Fact:
Certified Teachers who are not in the classroom here in Lebanon:
1. Benneth, Cathy Program Consultant (*Retired teacher from Lebanon)
2. Cady, Cindy Literacy Coach (part time Title I teacher)
3. Chambers, Deanna Instructional Consultant/Peer Coach
4. Default-Toomb, Tami Writing TOSA
5. Ernst, Marla Math TOSA
6. Geoghegan, Tim Student Achievement Specialist
7. Kreder, Beth Student Assessment Specialist
8. Price, Debbie - Literacy Coach
9. Richards, Kai School Psychologist
10. Ross, Tracy - Instructional Coach
11. Seward, Jody - Instructional Coach
12. Spiker, Sue Program Consultant (*Retired teacher from Lebanon)
13. Stockdale, Erica Special Programs Consultant
14. Urban, Peg School Psychologist
15. Vore, Joe Math Instructional Coach
The School Directory for the state of Oregon can be found here:
http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=1495
The Directory includes information such as number of students and a list of important people in the district. The names for the Canby District are from the ODE phone list, the names for the others are found on the district websites for each district.
CANBY School District - Total Number of Students - 5044
1. Superintendent Deborah Sommer
2. Business Manager David Moore
3. Human Resources/Personnel Hank Harris
4. Curriculum and Assessment - Mary Hochstetler
5. Special Education Sondra Strong
6. Technology Joe Morelock
7. Safety/Facilities Wayne Layman
Greater Albany Public Schools - Total number of students -8949
http://albany.k12.or.us/
1. Superintendent: maria.delapoer@albany.k12.or.us
2. Assistant Superintendent: Steve Kunke steve.kunke@albany.k12.or.us
3. Director of Business and Operations: Russell Allen russ.allen@albany.k12.or.us
4. Director of Special Programs,Ryan Mattingly ryan.mattingly@albany.k12.or.us
5. Director of Human Resources: Randy Lary randy.lary@albany.k12.or.us
6. Director of Curriculum & Instruction: Diane Smith diane.smith@albany.k12.or.us
7. Director of Facilities: Jim McGowan jim.mcgowan@albany.k12.or.us Special Programs
Salem-Keizer School District - Total number of students - 39469
http://www.salkeiz.k12.or.us/
1. Superintendent: Sandy Husk (e-mail: husk_sandy@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
2. Deputy Superintendent: Glenn Gelbrich (e-mail: gelbrich_glenn@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
3. Chief Operations Officer: Rich Goward (e-mail: goward_richard@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
Director of Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment : John Weeks (e-mail: weeks_john@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
4. Director of Elementary Education: Steve Larson (e-mail: larson_steve@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
5. Director of Facilities: Luis Caraballo (e-mail: caraballo_luis@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
6. Director of Human Resources: Mary Cadez (e-mail: cadez_mary@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
7. Director of Student Services: Ruth Gelbrich (e-mail: gelbrich_ruth@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
8. Director of Technology: John Cuddy (e-mail: cuddy_john@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
9. Director of Community Relations and Communications: Jay Remy (e-mail: remy_jay@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
10. Director of Bilingual Services and Compensatory Education: David Bautista (e-mail: bautista_david@salkeiz.k12.or.us)
Lebanon Community School District - Total number of students - 4336
http://www.lebanon.k12.or.us/
1. Superintendent - Jim Robinson 451-8511 ex.224
2. Assistant Superintendent - Steve Kelley 451-8511 ex. 223
3. Director of Business - Linda Darling ex.233
4. Administrator of Special Education Programs Laurie Glazener ex. 236
5. Director of Nutrition Services - Pam Lessley ex. 237
6. Director of Operations - Larry Tilford 259-8911 1110
7. Director of Student Achievement - Jan Zarate ex. 270
8. Director of Technology Services Brian Bray 259-8993 1008
9. Transportation - Maggie Estes -259-8931 1131
Another Interesting Fact:
Certified Teachers who are not in the classroom here in Lebanon:
1. Benneth, Cathy Program Consultant (*Retired teacher from Lebanon)
2. Cady, Cindy Literacy Coach (part time Title I teacher)
3. Chambers, Deanna Instructional Consultant/Peer Coach
4. Default-Toomb, Tami Writing TOSA
5. Ernst, Marla Math TOSA
6. Geoghegan, Tim Student Achievement Specialist
7. Kreder, Beth Student Assessment Specialist
8. Price, Debbie - Literacy Coach
9. Richards, Kai School Psychologist
10. Ross, Tracy - Instructional Coach
11. Seward, Jody - Instructional Coach
12. Spiker, Sue Program Consultant (*Retired teacher from Lebanon)
13. Stockdale, Erica Special Programs Consultant
14. Urban, Peg School Psychologist
15. Vore, Joe Math Instructional Coach
Let me explain the math behind rumor #5
I know that last rumor was a bit confusing... but then that is why it has been allowed to continue.... No one gets it, so no one questions it.
Try this....
First understand the "benchmarks" in Lebanon
Early benchmark 1 (educationally equal to kindergarten and 1st grade) Usually 5 and 6 year olds
Mid-benchamark 1 (same level as 2nd grade) Usually 7 year olds.
Adv. benchmark 1 (3rd grade) Usually 8 years old.
BIG IMPORTANT HIGH STAKES TEST
Early benchmark 2 (4th grade) Usually 9 year olds.
NEXT:
Lets say that we have 100 8 year olds in Lebanon.
3 of them are in early benchmark 2 and will not be tested on the high stakes test.
17 of them are in mid-benchmark 1 and will not be tested.
80 of them take the state's "Third Grade" test and of them
60 meet and 15 exceed! Whoo Hoo!
Our district might report that 75% met and 18.75% exceeded for a total of 93.75% meeting or exceeding.
That looks great until you remember that we were supposed to test ALL 100 8 year olds.
So technically 60% met and 15% exceeed and therefore only 75% met or exceeded and suddenly the numbers aren't so cool.
Teachers have stated over the years that the district has in the past not tested students with the age level tests. Has that practiced stopped or are we still cooking the books?
Try this....
First understand the "benchmarks" in Lebanon
Early benchmark 1 (educationally equal to kindergarten and 1st grade) Usually 5 and 6 year olds
Mid-benchamark 1 (same level as 2nd grade) Usually 7 year olds.
Adv. benchmark 1 (3rd grade) Usually 8 years old.
BIG IMPORTANT HIGH STAKES TEST
Early benchmark 2 (4th grade) Usually 9 year olds.
NEXT:
Lets say that we have 100 8 year olds in Lebanon.
3 of them are in early benchmark 2 and will not be tested on the high stakes test.
17 of them are in mid-benchmark 1 and will not be tested.
80 of them take the state's "Third Grade" test and of them
60 meet and 15 exceed! Whoo Hoo!
Our district might report that 75% met and 18.75% exceeded for a total of 93.75% meeting or exceeding.
That looks great until you remember that we were supposed to test ALL 100 8 year olds.
So technically 60% met and 15% exceeed and therefore only 75% met or exceeded and suddenly the numbers aren't so cool.
Teachers have stated over the years that the district has in the past not tested students with the age level tests. Has that practiced stopped or are we still cooking the books?
Rumor has it #5
Rumor has it that the Student Achievement System was designed to make it possible to improve our test scores without improving the students...
Why would people think that?
If you ask the federal government, or the State of Oregon Department of Education when students should be tested they will tell you you either test by grade or by age. If your school has grades you test grades 3, 5, 8, and 10. If your school is ungraded you test ages 8, 10, 13 and 15.
What happens if you have ungraded schools where you place students "where they belong" academically, but you test them by grades?
You have 8 year olds not taking the test because they are placed with 7 year olds in a class that will be considered 2nd grade who then miraculously move on to be with their own age the next year and will not be tested again because they are "no longer 3rd graders."
According to the district...we do not have grades, we have benchmarks......
Now look at the records...do we test all of the same age students with the same tests?
Technically we should be.
Our SAS reminds me of something.... Oh yes....
The Houston Miracle! You might want to take a look at these articles: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3403664/
http://www.resultsforamerica.org/calendar/files/Document1.pdf
http://nochildleft.com/2003/sept03miracles.html
Why would people think that?
If you ask the federal government, or the State of Oregon Department of Education when students should be tested they will tell you you either test by grade or by age. If your school has grades you test grades 3, 5, 8, and 10. If your school is ungraded you test ages 8, 10, 13 and 15.
What happens if you have ungraded schools where you place students "where they belong" academically, but you test them by grades?
You have 8 year olds not taking the test because they are placed with 7 year olds in a class that will be considered 2nd grade who then miraculously move on to be with their own age the next year and will not be tested again because they are "no longer 3rd graders."
According to the district...we do not have grades, we have benchmarks......
Now look at the records...do we test all of the same age students with the same tests?
Technically we should be.
Our SAS reminds me of something.... Oh yes....
The Houston Miracle! You might want to take a look at these articles: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3403664/
http://www.resultsforamerica.org/calendar/files/Document1.pdf
http://nochildleft.com/2003/sept03miracles.html
Rumor has it #4
Rumor has it that John (Tre) Kennedy (Business partner of Tom McHill who is the legal counsel for the other blogger) has offered to act as a mediator between the district and various entities....
What's wrong with that? one might ask....
When Board Directors Alexander, Wineteer and Shimmin tried to place Mr. Robinson on leave and tried to limit the influence and scope of his control over the district they were met with threats of lawsuits for trying to interfere with Mr. Robinson power.
Unless Mr. Kennedy was representing Mr. Robinson (which we know he does not), he would appear to be trying to lure people into looking like they were "trying to interfere" so that Mr. Robinson could increase the realm of his threats to litigate.
Rumor also has it that a community member who was approached believed that Mr. Kennedy was indeed the district representative.
Mr. Kennedy might want to make sure that he clearly states his role, scope of influence and motives when approaching highly charged political situations in Lebanon.
What's wrong with that? one might ask....
When Board Directors Alexander, Wineteer and Shimmin tried to place Mr. Robinson on leave and tried to limit the influence and scope of his control over the district they were met with threats of lawsuits for trying to interfere with Mr. Robinson power.
Unless Mr. Kennedy was representing Mr. Robinson (which we know he does not), he would appear to be trying to lure people into looking like they were "trying to interfere" so that Mr. Robinson could increase the realm of his threats to litigate.
Rumor also has it that a community member who was approached believed that Mr. Kennedy was indeed the district representative.
Mr. Kennedy might want to make sure that he clearly states his role, scope of influence and motives when approaching highly charged political situations in Lebanon.
Fear and Retaliation in Lebanon
Many have wondered why there is so much noise from the Jim Robinson camp and so little opposition voiced publicly. People whisper in the parking lot and at the grocery store but beg, "don't let anyone know that I said something, I don't need the negative attacks!"
The district swears up and down that they want to hear from everyone but in just about every case, the people with major concerns who speak up receive retaliation.
Let's take a walk down memory lane....
1. Bo Yates, Rob Allen, Boys and Girls Club leadership and the coaches of the district: This group has been hit hard with insults and attacks from the other blogger, and even though he had been authorized by the district to work out a solution, Bo Yates was smacked with a TSPC complaint by district office administration in an attempt to discredit him.
Let's not forget the complaint was dismissed by TSPC.
2. Debi Shimmin, Josh Wineteer, Rick Alexander: This group have been trying to require that the district follow law and ethics, they have been seeking to stop the violations of special education law, testing laws, bargaining laws, free speech laws, and the disregard by administration of the value of staff loyalty and participation in the decisions that impact them. This group has been harrassed by the other blogger, had recall efforts placed against them and Jim Robinson regularly threatens to sue Mr. Alexander and Mr. Wineteer, and in fact HAS filed lawsuits against them as well as the district. They received threatening phone calls and messages and have had to hire personal lawyers to defend themselves for protected actions taken lawfully as board members.
Let's not forget that Jim Robinson has never won a lawsuit against them.
3. Kim Fandino and the teacher union: Granted Ms. Fandino has been a thorn in the side of the district for a long time due to her constant reminders of legal concerns, the grievances and lawsuits brought against the district, her comments about the teacher turnover, the crowded classrooms, the misdirection of district funds, the intimidation and harrassment of administration toward teachers and staff, the issues around bargaining over the years.... oh, and the 81% of the teacher vote of NO CONFIDENCE in Jim Robinson in 2004 that was never truly addressed by the school board.
Ms. Fandino has been attacked by the other blogger, had a letter placed in her file for almost three years for speaking to a board member, has been insulted and even threatened in public board sessions by audience members who are from the CARES group, and has been publicly maligned as an individual for actions she was required by law to perform as a part of her elected position.
Let's not forget that the union won the lawsuit and the letter had to be removed from her file and District policy was ruled illegal on its face.
4. The Bauers: These two employees were asked by the district to go to a conference several years ago. The paperwork was filled out by the district. They requested reimbursement that was less than the "per diem" expenses that board policy allowed for. However, they had recently filed personal complaints about things relative to their own children's education in Lebanon and were now "on the radar." As I am sure you can guess... they had a complaint filed against them by district administration relative to their reimbursement request. The complaint contained many inaccuracies and false accusations. However, district administration saw fit to allow a copy of it out to the other blogger even though it had not been ruled on.
Let's not forget that the complaint was thrown out by the government agency.
5. Ed Sansom: This administrator has spoken up about concerns and obviously did something to annoy the district because although there are other administrators that have been complained about repeatedly, they are protected by district admin. But, poor Ed, he must have done something because not only has he been blogged and possibly has had mis-information about him spread intentionally, but the district office wants to fire him.
Now don't get me wrong, poor administration and poor teachers should not be working in schools... however, Mr. Sansom has a much better reputation among those who count (teachers, parents and students) than several other administrators. Why was he singled out?
Let's not forget the main issue cited as reasons for the non-renewall..... Communication.... isn't that kind of like the pot calling the kettle black?
6. In general, almost every person who has spoken up at a board meeting in opposition to the direction of the district has been blogged negatively by the other blogger.
So fear and retaliation reign supreme in Lebanon.... ain't free speech great?
The district swears up and down that they want to hear from everyone but in just about every case, the people with major concerns who speak up receive retaliation.
Let's take a walk down memory lane....
1. Bo Yates, Rob Allen, Boys and Girls Club leadership and the coaches of the district: This group has been hit hard with insults and attacks from the other blogger, and even though he had been authorized by the district to work out a solution, Bo Yates was smacked with a TSPC complaint by district office administration in an attempt to discredit him.
Let's not forget the complaint was dismissed by TSPC.
2. Debi Shimmin, Josh Wineteer, Rick Alexander: This group have been trying to require that the district follow law and ethics, they have been seeking to stop the violations of special education law, testing laws, bargaining laws, free speech laws, and the disregard by administration of the value of staff loyalty and participation in the decisions that impact them. This group has been harrassed by the other blogger, had recall efforts placed against them and Jim Robinson regularly threatens to sue Mr. Alexander and Mr. Wineteer, and in fact HAS filed lawsuits against them as well as the district. They received threatening phone calls and messages and have had to hire personal lawyers to defend themselves for protected actions taken lawfully as board members.
Let's not forget that Jim Robinson has never won a lawsuit against them.
3. Kim Fandino and the teacher union: Granted Ms. Fandino has been a thorn in the side of the district for a long time due to her constant reminders of legal concerns, the grievances and lawsuits brought against the district, her comments about the teacher turnover, the crowded classrooms, the misdirection of district funds, the intimidation and harrassment of administration toward teachers and staff, the issues around bargaining over the years.... oh, and the 81% of the teacher vote of NO CONFIDENCE in Jim Robinson in 2004 that was never truly addressed by the school board.
Ms. Fandino has been attacked by the other blogger, had a letter placed in her file for almost three years for speaking to a board member, has been insulted and even threatened in public board sessions by audience members who are from the CARES group, and has been publicly maligned as an individual for actions she was required by law to perform as a part of her elected position.
Let's not forget that the union won the lawsuit and the letter had to be removed from her file and District policy was ruled illegal on its face.
4. The Bauers: These two employees were asked by the district to go to a conference several years ago. The paperwork was filled out by the district. They requested reimbursement that was less than the "per diem" expenses that board policy allowed for. However, they had recently filed personal complaints about things relative to their own children's education in Lebanon and were now "on the radar." As I am sure you can guess... they had a complaint filed against them by district administration relative to their reimbursement request. The complaint contained many inaccuracies and false accusations. However, district administration saw fit to allow a copy of it out to the other blogger even though it had not been ruled on.
Let's not forget that the complaint was thrown out by the government agency.
5. Ed Sansom: This administrator has spoken up about concerns and obviously did something to annoy the district because although there are other administrators that have been complained about repeatedly, they are protected by district admin. But, poor Ed, he must have done something because not only has he been blogged and possibly has had mis-information about him spread intentionally, but the district office wants to fire him.
Now don't get me wrong, poor administration and poor teachers should not be working in schools... however, Mr. Sansom has a much better reputation among those who count (teachers, parents and students) than several other administrators. Why was he singled out?
Let's not forget the main issue cited as reasons for the non-renewall..... Communication.... isn't that kind of like the pot calling the kettle black?
6. In general, almost every person who has spoken up at a board meeting in opposition to the direction of the district has been blogged negatively by the other blogger.
So fear and retaliation reign supreme in Lebanon.... ain't free speech great?
Friday, September 12, 2008
About the math meeting...
Cheryl McAllister did a nice job of explaining the bigger picture with the math situation at LHS in her letter to the editor for the Democrat-Herald.
The math issue is actually secondary to the bigger issue of communication with and from the district. Once again they got it wrong.
This district likes to pretend that each person with a complaint is "just one disgruntled person" not a representative of others, nor the tip of an iceberg.
When they can say... "Only a few complaints were made" after a meeting where maybe 5 people spoke but 100 were vigourously nodding their heads... it makes it hard to believe that they really want to hear anything.
The parents wanted a forum. The district wanted an opportunity to portray their detractors as uncontrollable, overly-emotional, uninformed people. The district won.
If this had been an arm wrestling match the district would have had Arnold Scwartzenegger as their "facilitator" and they would have been requiring the community to have their arms strapped down to the table. The community would have complained, but the district could still say, "we offered them the opportunity, and they chose not to take it."
The math issue is actually secondary to the bigger issue of communication with and from the district. Once again they got it wrong.
This district likes to pretend that each person with a complaint is "just one disgruntled person" not a representative of others, nor the tip of an iceberg.
When they can say... "Only a few complaints were made" after a meeting where maybe 5 people spoke but 100 were vigourously nodding their heads... it makes it hard to believe that they really want to hear anything.
The parents wanted a forum. The district wanted an opportunity to portray their detractors as uncontrollable, overly-emotional, uninformed people. The district won.
If this had been an arm wrestling match the district would have had Arnold Scwartzenegger as their "facilitator" and they would have been requiring the community to have their arms strapped down to the table. The community would have complained, but the district could still say, "we offered them the opportunity, and they chose not to take it."
Who foots the bill #2?
Along with the recall effort which will be paid for by the district, long-time community member Lynden Brown has been asking repeatedly at board meetings for information about the cost of things in the school district and the list would appear to be growing, so one should really be wondering....
How much does it cost?
1. The recall
2. The failed lawsuits
3. The failed arbitrations
4. The lost students
5. The training required to bring unexperienced employees up to speed
6. The extra administrators
7. The teachers who aren't in the classrom
8. The travel for large teams to go to recruiting fairs
9. The nice lunches provided by the district for district meetings
10. The constant massive remodeling and movement (furniture and construction) at LHS.
VS.
What is the cost of:
1. An effective alternative edcuation program
2. More teachers in the elementary classes
3. Department heads at the high school
4. Club advisors
5. Middle school sports
How much does it cost?
1. The recall
2. The failed lawsuits
3. The failed arbitrations
4. The lost students
5. The training required to bring unexperienced employees up to speed
6. The extra administrators
7. The teachers who aren't in the classrom
8. The travel for large teams to go to recruiting fairs
9. The nice lunches provided by the district for district meetings
10. The constant massive remodeling and movement (furniture and construction) at LHS.
VS.
What is the cost of:
1. An effective alternative edcuation program
2. More teachers in the elementary classes
3. Department heads at the high school
4. Club advisors
5. Middle school sports
What's up with the Superintendent?
Things that make you go hmm...
According to the Lebanon Community School Board agenda there is an executive session planned for Monday night followed by an open session with one agenda item.
It is an action item having to do with an action on the Superintendent.
According to the Lebanon Community School Board agenda there is an executive session planned for Monday night followed by an open session with one agenda item.
It is an action item having to do with an action on the Superintendent.
Theory #2 - Smoke and Mirrors
If you look at the earlier posting with the directions on how to look at the Secretary of State's elections information webpage a very interesting concept that has been floating around the community starts to gather substance and clarity....
It is the same small group of people who have created SEVEN different political action committees which are designed to do the following things:
1. Allow them to move funds from one issue to another by transfering funds from one PAC to another so people do not have to have their names mentioned multiple times in coordination with the contentious issues.
2. Allow them to hide behind the cover of an unknown number of people in a group to make the group "seem" bigger... (could be just 1 person technically, but doesn't it sound impressive to say "the committee"?)
So..... who CARES???? and who else is involved in all this PAC activity?
Michael Farnsworth (treasurer, former board member, JR supporter), Dave Benneth (treasurer, JR supporter), Catherine Watts (blogger contributor - fact, JR supporter), Jennifer Walter (blogger creator - rumor, JR supporter), Warren Beeson (former board member, JR supporter), Dr. William Barish (former board member, JR supporter), Carol Chevernak (Dr. Barish wife), Lou and Kim Masog (LHS administrator and spouse, JR supporters), Sherrie Sprenger (received funds from PACs, recall effort thwarted by a PAC, former board member, JR supporter), Steve and Leigh Kelley (Assistant Superintendent and spouse, JR supporters), Joyce Weatherly (JR supporter), John (Tre) Kennedy (PAC creator and Business colleague of Tom McHill, JR supporter), Chris Fisher (recall effort thwarted by a PAC, board member, JR supporter), Tom McHill (recall effort thwarted by a PAC).
Is anyone else willing to add their names to this list????
It is the same small group of people who have created SEVEN different political action committees which are designed to do the following things:
1. Allow them to move funds from one issue to another by transfering funds from one PAC to another so people do not have to have their names mentioned multiple times in coordination with the contentious issues.
2. Allow them to hide behind the cover of an unknown number of people in a group to make the group "seem" bigger... (could be just 1 person technically, but doesn't it sound impressive to say "the committee"?)
So..... who CARES???? and who else is involved in all this PAC activity?
Michael Farnsworth (treasurer, former board member, JR supporter), Dave Benneth (treasurer, JR supporter), Catherine Watts (blogger contributor - fact, JR supporter), Jennifer Walter (blogger creator - rumor, JR supporter), Warren Beeson (former board member, JR supporter), Dr. William Barish (former board member, JR supporter), Carol Chevernak (Dr. Barish wife), Lou and Kim Masog (LHS administrator and spouse, JR supporters), Sherrie Sprenger (received funds from PACs, recall effort thwarted by a PAC, former board member, JR supporter), Steve and Leigh Kelley (Assistant Superintendent and spouse, JR supporters), Joyce Weatherly (JR supporter), John (Tre) Kennedy (PAC creator and Business colleague of Tom McHill, JR supporter), Chris Fisher (recall effort thwarted by a PAC, board member, JR supporter), Tom McHill (recall effort thwarted by a PAC).
Is anyone else willing to add their names to this list????
Theory # 1 - It's all about 3 votes
So what is all of the fuss about? Why has this division in the community?
It could be about Jim Robinson and his need for three votes on the Lebanon School Board to keep control of the school district.
He has often said that he does not need the community, he does not need the parents, he does not need the teachers, he does not need the students....
... he needs three votes... and he currently has lost them... he wants them back....
his friends are working hard to get them back....
It was easy when it was just "one rogue board member" (Rick Alexander)
It was in jeopardy when Winteer and Fisher were elected on a J.R. needs to go platform and Alexander was reelected with 75%.... but Mr. Robinson knew he only needed to sway one of those men and he chose the one who demonstrated weakness and the ability to confuse easily.
He got his third vote back in Fisher and could then dismiss Alexander and Wineteer and try to discredit them as self-interested.
Then (unfortunately for Mr. Robinson) Ms. Shimmin was elected and she was not going to be a puppet. She was immediately attacked by the anonymous blogger and people from the CARES group (see other postings).
Mr. Robinson's group of friends had to take over the fight more agressively to get that third vote back, but unfortunately in the midst of the storm Sherrie Sprenger had to bail or potentially lose the other election she wanted to win that had more power and influence.
She was replaced by a fourth vote on the opposite side.....
Now it is all about a small group of bullies trying to force their way back into control because they can't win on the merits of the issues.
It is not about good schools...
It is not about good community...
It is about 3 votes.
It could be about Jim Robinson and his need for three votes on the Lebanon School Board to keep control of the school district.
He has often said that he does not need the community, he does not need the parents, he does not need the teachers, he does not need the students....
... he needs three votes... and he currently has lost them... he wants them back....
his friends are working hard to get them back....
It was easy when it was just "one rogue board member" (Rick Alexander)
It was in jeopardy when Winteer and Fisher were elected on a J.R. needs to go platform and Alexander was reelected with 75%.... but Mr. Robinson knew he only needed to sway one of those men and he chose the one who demonstrated weakness and the ability to confuse easily.
He got his third vote back in Fisher and could then dismiss Alexander and Wineteer and try to discredit them as self-interested.
Then (unfortunately for Mr. Robinson) Ms. Shimmin was elected and she was not going to be a puppet. She was immediately attacked by the anonymous blogger and people from the CARES group (see other postings).
Mr. Robinson's group of friends had to take over the fight more agressively to get that third vote back, but unfortunately in the midst of the storm Sherrie Sprenger had to bail or potentially lose the other election she wanted to win that had more power and influence.
She was replaced by a fourth vote on the opposite side.....
Now it is all about a small group of bullies trying to force their way back into control because they can't win on the merits of the issues.
It is not about good schools...
It is not about good community...
It is about 3 votes.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Rumor and Rationale #3
Rumor has it that district personnel are connected to the blog....
Why would people think that?
Conversations from meetings of only teachers were blogged.
Conversations from meetings of only administrators were blogged.
Conversations in district committee meetings were blogged......
Conversations among district employees only were blogged.....
....someone from each of those groups has to be sharing....
Things that make you go "hmm".... Who has most benefitted from the creation of the blog?
Why would people think that?
Conversations from meetings of only teachers were blogged.
Conversations from meetings of only administrators were blogged.
Conversations in district committee meetings were blogged......
Conversations among district employees only were blogged.....
....someone from each of those groups has to be sharing....
Things that make you go "hmm".... Who has most benefitted from the creation of the blog?
Rumor and Rationale #2
Rumor has it that the Lebanon CARES group is connect to the anonymous blog....
Why would people think that?
1. Ms. Watts (a money contributor to the CARES group) yelled out in a public board meeting that she had contributed and would continue to contribute to the blog.
2. The Blog and CARES mimic each other often in their message.
Why would people think that?
1. Ms. Watts (a money contributor to the CARES group) yelled out in a public board meeting that she had contributed and would continue to contribute to the blog.
2. The Blog and CARES mimic each other often in their message.
Rumor and Rationale #1
Rumor has it that Jennifer Walter is the annonymous blogger in Lebanon...
Why would people think that? Could be because the annonymous blogger has the following characteristics in common with Ms. Walter...
1. Has an in depth knowledge of Social Studies and Language Arts curriculum at LHS.
2. Has demonstrated negative behaviors toward the following people: the mayor, Bo Yates, Rick Alexander, Josh Wineteer, Debi Shimmin, several teachers at LHS as well as Kim Fandino the union president, Rob Allen and the coaches in the district, among others who have been attacked on the blog.
3. Has a knowledge of legal procedures and process.
and....
4. Students in her classes who have read the blog say that Ms. Walter's comments on the blog often mirror comments made in her class.
Why would people think that? Could be because the annonymous blogger has the following characteristics in common with Ms. Walter...
1. Has an in depth knowledge of Social Studies and Language Arts curriculum at LHS.
2. Has demonstrated negative behaviors toward the following people: the mayor, Bo Yates, Rick Alexander, Josh Wineteer, Debi Shimmin, several teachers at LHS as well as Kim Fandino the union president, Rob Allen and the coaches in the district, among others who have been attacked on the blog.
3. Has a knowledge of legal procedures and process.
and....
4. Students in her classes who have read the blog say that Ms. Walter's comments on the blog often mirror comments made in her class.
Who foots the bill?
The Lebanon Community School disctrict will foot the bill for the recall election according to the Albany Democrat Herald...
How can a group that CARES about our children want to use school money for a vendetta against two members who are up for reelection in a few months anyway?
How can a group that CARES about our children want to use school money for a vendetta against two members who are up for reelection in a few months anyway?
A smattering of facts...
Jim Robinson was non-renewed from both of his prior districts and was declared retaliatory by board members in those districts.
Lebanon High School alone is down 450 students in enrollment and the freshman class which used to come in each fall with 375-400 students started this year with less than 300.
The following are some of the classes that used to exist at Lebanon High School that were destroyed by the administrators of the academies because they didn't believe in "advanced" classes. (Mr. Finch is one of those administrators): Advanced LA 9, Adv. LA 10, Adv. LA 11, Adv. LA 12, Adv. Global Studies, Adv. US History, Adv. Government, Adv. Economics, Adv. Personal Finance.
There are students in the elementary schools that are as much as 4 years older or younger than the kids in their class since we do not have "grades". (Note* this is illegal if the students are Special Ed students)
Special Education student IEPs are changed without the authorization of the parents.
Personal friends of Jim Robinson get really cool high paying jobs in Lebanon. Steve Kelley (promoted from Dir. of Curriculum to Assistant Superintendent), Jan Zarate (promoted from teacher to Director of curriculum), Linda Darling (hired as Dir. of finance with no prior experience), Kim Masog (LHS Academy Administrator with no high school experience) et. al.
There are more administrators in Lebanon than we need.
Lebanon High School alone is down 450 students in enrollment and the freshman class which used to come in each fall with 375-400 students started this year with less than 300.
The following are some of the classes that used to exist at Lebanon High School that were destroyed by the administrators of the academies because they didn't believe in "advanced" classes. (Mr. Finch is one of those administrators): Advanced LA 9, Adv. LA 10, Adv. LA 11, Adv. LA 12, Adv. Global Studies, Adv. US History, Adv. Government, Adv. Economics, Adv. Personal Finance.
There are students in the elementary schools that are as much as 4 years older or younger than the kids in their class since we do not have "grades". (Note* this is illegal if the students are Special Ed students)
Special Education student IEPs are changed without the authorization of the parents.
Personal friends of Jim Robinson get really cool high paying jobs in Lebanon. Steve Kelley (promoted from Dir. of Curriculum to Assistant Superintendent), Jan Zarate (promoted from teacher to Director of curriculum), Linda Darling (hired as Dir. of finance with no prior experience), Kim Masog (LHS Academy Administrator with no high school experience) et. al.
There are more administrators in Lebanon than we need.
Follow the money
In examining the Oregon Secretary of State webpage related to the financial activities of political action groups there is a disturbing almost incestuous relationship between seven different PACs.
If you go to https://secure.sos.state.or.us/eim/jsp/CEMainPage.jsp and type in the name
"Lebanon CARES" you will start down a trail of links that when compiled give you the following information:
While Mike Farnsworth is the treasurer of Lebanon CARES and the two committees created to recall Lebanon School Board members Alexander and Wineteer...
Mike's PACs:
1. Lebanon CARES PAC
2. The Committee to Recall Rick Alexander, Director Zone 2
3. The Committee to Recall Josh Wineteer, Director Zone 5
Lebanon CARES member Dave Benneth is the treasurer for four other PACs (all can be researched by placing the name of the committee in the search spot on the secretary of state webpage).
Dave's PACs:
4. PAC - Building Schools - Building Futures (Objective: Oppose the Recall of McHill, Sprenger and Fisher)
5. PAC - Citizens for Truth and Jobs (Objective: Support or Opposition of Specific Candidates)
6. PAC - Friends of Sherrie Sprenger
7. PAC - Friends of Debi Shimmin
If you look at the financial acitivity of each of these PACs on the Secretary of State's website you also find that:
1. The Lebanon CARES PAC gave money to both recall effort PACs (Alexander and Wineteer) AND the Building Schools - Building Futures PAC.
2. The Building Schools - Building Futures PAC gave money to Lebanon CARES PAC, Friends of Debi Shimmin PAC and Friends of Sherrie Sprenger PAC
3. The Citizens for Truth and Jobs PAC gave money to Friends of Debi Shimmin PAC and Friends of Sherrie Sprenger PAC
People associated with the PACs:
1. Lebanon CARES PAC - Michael Farnsworth (treasurer and contributor), Dave Benneth (spokesperson at Board meetings), Connie Schmidt and her business Lebanon Animal Hospital, Catherine Watts, Dr. William Barish, Masog Mink Ranch, Joyce Weatherly, Zachary Webb, Jennifer Walter and John Kennedy (business partner of Tom McHill).
2. The Committee to Recall Rick Alexander, Director Zone 2 - Lebanon CARES (see above)
3. The Committee to Recall Josh Wineteer, Director Zone 5 - Lebanon CARES (see above)
4. PAC - Building Schools - Building Futures (Objective: Oppose the Recall of McHill, Sprenger and Fisher) - Lebanon CARES (see above), Carol Chervenek (wife of Dr. Barish), Friends of Sherrie Sprenger (see below), Friends of Debi Shimmin (see below)
5. PAC - Citizens for Truth and Jobs (Objective: Support or Opposition of Specific Candidates) - Friends of Sherrie Sprenger PAC (see below), Friends of Debi Shimmin PAC (see below)
6. PAC - Friends of Sherrie Sprenger - Dr. William Barish, Citizens for Truth and Jobs PAC, Building Schools - Building Futures PAC
7. PAC - Friends of Debi Shimmin - Citizens for Truth and Jobs PAC, Building Schools - Building Futures PAC (It should be noted that Debi returned money to the Building Schools group - it is denoted as an expenditure AND a contribution)
If you go to https://secure.sos.state.or.us/eim/jsp/CEMainPage.jsp and type in the name
"Lebanon CARES" you will start down a trail of links that when compiled give you the following information:
While Mike Farnsworth is the treasurer of Lebanon CARES and the two committees created to recall Lebanon School Board members Alexander and Wineteer...
Mike's PACs:
1. Lebanon CARES PAC
2. The Committee to Recall Rick Alexander, Director Zone 2
3. The Committee to Recall Josh Wineteer, Director Zone 5
Lebanon CARES member Dave Benneth is the treasurer for four other PACs (all can be researched by placing the name of the committee in the search spot on the secretary of state webpage).
Dave's PACs:
4. PAC - Building Schools - Building Futures (Objective: Oppose the Recall of McHill, Sprenger and Fisher)
5. PAC - Citizens for Truth and Jobs (Objective: Support or Opposition of Specific Candidates)
6. PAC - Friends of Sherrie Sprenger
7. PAC - Friends of Debi Shimmin
If you look at the financial acitivity of each of these PACs on the Secretary of State's website you also find that:
1. The Lebanon CARES PAC gave money to both recall effort PACs (Alexander and Wineteer) AND the Building Schools - Building Futures PAC.
2. The Building Schools - Building Futures PAC gave money to Lebanon CARES PAC, Friends of Debi Shimmin PAC and Friends of Sherrie Sprenger PAC
3. The Citizens for Truth and Jobs PAC gave money to Friends of Debi Shimmin PAC and Friends of Sherrie Sprenger PAC
People associated with the PACs:
1. Lebanon CARES PAC - Michael Farnsworth (treasurer and contributor), Dave Benneth (spokesperson at Board meetings), Connie Schmidt and her business Lebanon Animal Hospital, Catherine Watts, Dr. William Barish, Masog Mink Ranch, Joyce Weatherly, Zachary Webb, Jennifer Walter and John Kennedy (business partner of Tom McHill).
2. The Committee to Recall Rick Alexander, Director Zone 2 - Lebanon CARES (see above)
3. The Committee to Recall Josh Wineteer, Director Zone 5 - Lebanon CARES (see above)
4. PAC - Building Schools - Building Futures (Objective: Oppose the Recall of McHill, Sprenger and Fisher) - Lebanon CARES (see above), Carol Chervenek (wife of Dr. Barish), Friends of Sherrie Sprenger (see below), Friends of Debi Shimmin (see below)
5. PAC - Citizens for Truth and Jobs (Objective: Support or Opposition of Specific Candidates) - Friends of Sherrie Sprenger PAC (see below), Friends of Debi Shimmin PAC (see below)
6. PAC - Friends of Sherrie Sprenger - Dr. William Barish, Citizens for Truth and Jobs PAC, Building Schools - Building Futures PAC
7. PAC - Friends of Debi Shimmin - Citizens for Truth and Jobs PAC, Building Schools - Building Futures PAC (It should be noted that Debi returned money to the Building Schools group - it is denoted as an expenditure AND a contribution)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)