Now I think we can all agree that the words Trump used were awful. Not sure if you have seen this just released video.
Antigone's is a HUB on 4th ave, I hope it continues on with new owners as high quality as Trudy and Kate.
I never said it was. I simply stated that once we left the public schools we actually achieved equality with the board that actually did represent parents. TUSD will never achieve that participatory level because of the money and power involved. There are many upper income parents upset with public schools.
No, it's not public schools VS. private schools, Rat T. It's poor urban public schools in the death grip of a corrupt political machine VS. schools, public and private, where the parent community has enough social capital to organize itself effectively and hold administration accountable. Parents have plenty of power in districts like Catalina Foothills, Tanque Verde, and Vail. What happens in districts like TUSD is the majority of the parents aren't able to develop the leverage they need to ensure good management, and corruption and machine politics take over. It has happened in any number of poor urban public districts in cities throughout the U.S.
When parents who do have some leverage step forward and try to get things cleaned up, they get smeared like the Campbells are now being smeared.
But there are many signs that Raul Grijalva is losing his grip. What's happening in TUSD right now may or may not result in a change of leadership on the board of the district in November 2016, but it seems highly likely that it will prevent Adelita Grijalva from taking her father's place in Congress when he proposes to pass the baton to the next generation of Grijalva leadership. The electorate in TUSD is easier to manipulate than the electorate in a congressional district, and if you look around Southern Arizona, you will see that candidates independent of the Grijalva machine are gaining strength in challenging their opponents and sometimes winning elected office.
It's just a matter of time before this particular regime is over, but unfortunately it will be a painful and ugly process watching the politics surrounding TUSD as the machine that has been running it loses its will to lead and finally, after decades of having its way, breaks down.
The dude needs a spliff.
He also needs to quit having false concern about how others choose to medicate and/or relax.
We are all ADULTS here, correct?
Hey David, you forgot to highlight the past history of the other principal in TUSD Kids First - CPA Jimmy Lovelace. Here's his editorial piece about how the board majority and superintendent changed the residency requirements on the TUSD audit committee after he started asking questions they did not want to answer:
Chuck Kill's piece on the changes made to the audit committee is also good:
Here's a good passage from Kill's editorial that describes very well the kind of thing that goes on in TUSD under its current "leadership":
"In addition to changing the residency requirement for audit committee members, the Governing Board also added the district CFO as a permanent voting member of the audit committee. The committee was designed to assist the board by making sure it was independent of the TUSD management team. With the addition of the CFO to the audit committee (including the possibility of chairing it), the committee will lose some independence from the TUSD management team, since the CFO reports directly to the district superintendent. It will actually be checking up on itself. In addition, since the CFO will be instrumental in recommending the new internal auditor, that position will now also be subject to suspicion. Apparently, a majority of the Governing Board voted to substantially reduce the independence of the audit committee to give less oversight to the superintendent and the finances of the district. Additionally, other audit committee charter changes included removing protective language authorizing members to submit requests for information, setting the agenda and their direct role in selecting the external auditors."
It would seem that some of those taking such an interest in the Campbells' small donations to the campaigns of candidates in a school board race they care about, a race that will affect the quality of management in their children's schools, should perhaps direct some of their attention to how this public district's hundreds-of-millions-a-year budget is being managed and overseen. But genuine concern about real malfeasance seems to be beyond the ability of some -- they don't examine the actions of the $500K per year CEO in the district and the board majority that rubber stamps his questionable practices, they'd rather waste their time on baseless insinuations and speculations about how other TUSD parents are allocating their political contributions to board candidates.
You can't believe what a difference philanthopry and volunteerism take on once you pay tuition to a private school and actually become a temporary owner.
Public schools will never give back that decision making ability because it erodes the educrats source of power.
It's motivated by something: perhaps by the desire to see this district cleaned up. Some people, when they take a good, hard look at how the district is being run under Sanchez, feel outrage and it motivates a deep investment and hard work to expand community awareness of the need for reform in an institution delivering "education" to between 40,000 and 50,000 students.
People who accept the filthy quid-pro-quo way the district is being run see money motivation in everything and cannot believe there are people who would invest money in the hope of improving an institution that serves tens of thousands of young people, not in the hope of personal gain. What did Kathy Campbell expect in return when she invested in UHS college counseling? Improved services to students in a sadly underfunded institution. What does she hope to gain in investing money to "change the board"? Improved services in a district educating a troublingly large portion of our community's youth.
This is one of the many risks a community runs when it continues to allow one of its public institutions to be run the way TUSD is being run: the community looks at what is going on in its public institutions and comes to expect money motives, not genuine motives to serve the common good, in everything it sees, whether they are really there or not. It loses its belief that there can be clean motives in philanthropy and public service.
Corruption exists in, for example, things like the ESI donation to Foster and Juarez. But it is not everywhere, motivating everyone.
If at some point in the future it can be documented that a changed majority benefited the Campbells financially, then there will be grounds for concern. At this point there is no wrongdoing to point to, just philanthropy, civic concern, volunteerism, and community service.
What will the Campbells relationship with TUSD be in the future? I wouldn't be at all surprised if they, like so many others who have worked hard to benefit the district in the past and have encountered mistreatment while doing so, washed their hands of this diseased institution and walked away.
"MAS was a rigorous academic program that was known within Tucson High as having some of the more difficult and demanding classes of the school. It presented students with tools for critical analysis on our society's most entrenched problems." to quote Jacob Bricca from above.
My perception and analysis was different. MAS was intellectual rot and brain washing and its implementation was incompetent. There is an argument to be made for the creation of radicals and revolutionaries even though that creation is illegal under state law. However, our observation of these classes was that they were not even able to do that. .
The entire program was built around Marxist theory that all of history is the struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor. This is just horse manure. While Marx was writing these words in Europe, Vanderbilt was giving transportation on his steamboats for free, liberating the poor to move where ever opportunity was beckoning. Rockefeller was relentlessly reducing the price of lighting homes liberating the poor to read late into the night.
Neither Vanderbilt nor Rockefeller, so called robber barons, ever consumed even 1/10 of 1 percent of the wealth that they created. The only people they oppressed were companies profiteering at the expense of the poor. Rockefeller and Vanderbilt lived like the middle class. Rockefeller took the subway to work every day, didn't even have a private automobile.
The economic record is absolutely clear. The price of kerosene and transportation went down and down and down. It was the gilded age and America flourished and became the dominant economic power in the world.
All of South America is trapped by the "critical analysis" Bricca waxes poetic about. They have the highest murder rates in the world, ten times the United States. To quote a young TUSD MAS student in the Senate hearing "I never knew I was oppressed until I took this class." That is the poisonous framework they were instilling in each of these students. Once you define someone as an "oppressor" you can do anything to them, even murder. That's Marx's gift to mankind. 100 million dead in China, 40 million in Russia, 3 million dead in Cambodia, death, misery and poverty wherever that philosophy takes root and flourishes.
There was oppression in Marx's Europe. But it was oppression by government. France had ten times as many bureaucrats as the United States. Bureaucrats whose salaries had to be paid and whose dictates had to be obeyed.
And, we do have oppression in the United States. A k-12 system which doesn't provide one-tenth the academic growth that the poor are capable of, a university system which layers students with a hundred thousand dollars of debt and leaves the typical college student without any measurable cognitive gains, a welfare system which traps millions in poverty and general government which is five times as expensive as it needs to be.
That's where the real oppression lies.
Safier is like a whining adult blaming all of their failures on their parents. If only. Time spent getting even is better spent getting ahead. There is no evidence from the record that any of TUSD's problems would have been lessened even if MAS had not been challenged. TUSD has lost over 13,000 students since 2001 because parents now have choices. That trend started well before the MAS controversy. It is now an above average district in terms of academic gains and social outcomes and a very expensive district - so don't blame money. But above average is still mediocre and parents want excellence.
Nationwide, only 24% of parents rate the quality of their child's education excellent (Gallup). That means 76% would move if they had the choices that Arizona has. So far, only 20% of TUSD parents have left. Judging by the TUSD parent satisfaction survey, there are another 30,000 that will head to the doors over the next decade as more choices become available.
Then, only the 15,000 students getting an excellent education will be left.
You know, one has to question why someone would give $7,000 to TKF and then $12,500 to one candidate. $20,000 in a school board race: perfectly legal but definitely motivated by something. If you look at who's playing in the sandbox you see quickly this is about something larger than education or the district. The folks donating to TKF are coupling up for one reason. They stand to make a lot of money if they win. Why invest 20-large in a school board race? Because "changing the board" lets the donors grab up shuttered schools and develop on the land.
Jim Campbell can say it's about protecting his children. Sure, I won't criticize him for being a protective father. I will criticize him for saying he won't bid on future contracts. Hey everyone, that's great: I did it once when it suited me, but won't do it again.
Vote out Kristel Foster and Cam Juarez! It is time to change the Board!!
I find this article lacking in detail. It is written as inside baseball and leaves out the bigger story. I was tracking with the commenter 'jim campbell states the obvious' but my trust is blown mainly because on the one hand he is a real estate developer (ill assume successful) but on the other leaves his girls in school to be repeatedly beat up. Even poor folks could move their kid to a charter school... this person has Basis and St. Gregs available to them and could purchase peace of mind far easier than this bruising multi-year political struggle which won't pay off in time to make a difference for his kids anyway. I am disappointed.
A while back, Standard and Poors received a $5 million grant from the Gates Foundation to analyze school districts across the country. The Flowing Wells district was one of two districts in Arizona to out perform its demographics by two standard deviations. When you look inside of Flowing Wells, you see all the classic indicators: long time cohesive board members, leaders who develop other leaders for several generations, leaders who solved the performance pay problem in a way that creates teamwork and creates a culture that does many things in addition to producing good math and reading scores.
How is Babeu a candidate for anything? He's a first-class creep.
Dude, you need something.
Many of the comments have been helpful. Here's another site: http://tucson.com/news/local/education/tusd-board-candidates-take-on-education-issues/article_1204ffa6-c64a-596f-b493-f7a1701d76a9.html Thanks everyone: I feel like I got a good picture of the situation from your comments.
I would like take butch my dog molly would have a friend!
Take note TUSD supporters:
The decade of the 1980s was another time of great conflicts and intensity on the school board. Board members often criticized each other and the administration at public meetings. In contrast to the similar trouble in the '70s, however, there were no clearly drawn lines between the members. Alliances changed depending upon the issues. Although major decisions such as hiring the superintendent were often conducted on split votes, on many other areas they voted unanimously. Cutting the budget often brought out frustrated attacks on each other's priorities. That dissension carried over within the district administration.
In a February, 1986, speech to the Tucson Metropolitan Ministry, Dr. Houston described the tone of the district. He said, "The board may be the most visible example of this, but it's more than the board. It's between parents and board members, board members and teachers, teachers and administrators. This whole district has become programmed, over a period of time, to conflict, and I would rather be in the position of searching for solutions to problems than acting as a referee. We've got to stop this senseless bickering we have here and get on to some action.
WHAT HAS CHANGED IN 30 years? NOTHING!
The worst is not over. By any means.
Thanks wildkitty. If you want to know why Trump said what he said about McCain and being a prisoner of war, read this.
Don't look now, but the Clintons may be coming to your town next:
Tucson Weekly |
7225 Mona Lisa Rd. Ste. 125, Tucson AZ 85741 |
(520) 797-4384 |
Powered by Foundation