* IMPORTANT PAGES *

▼

Monday, March 26, 2012

Testing and the State Trustees




State of California
Edmund G. Brown Jr., Governor
State Board of Education seal
CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
1430 N Street, Suite 5111
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-319-0827
Fax: 916-319-0175


March 15, 2012

Norma Martinez
State Trustee
Greenfield Union School District
493 El Camino Real
Greenfield, CA 93927

Dear Ms. Martinez:
On behalf of the State Board of Education (SBE), we wish to thank you for your service as State Trustee of the Greenfield Union School District (SD). You have done an exemplary job and your commitment to the students, parents, and community of Greenfield is greatly appreciated.
As you know, at the September and November 2011 SBE meetings, the members of the SBE approved your recommendation to move towards the Exit Plan and return full local governing authority to the local governing board on or before June 30, 2012.
As you proposed, and we agreed in our follow-up discussions, your last day of service will be May 25, 2012. This will allow time for continuing work on some critical components of the exit plan, including the development and approval by the governing board of the academic plan for closing the achievement gap, development of a superintendent evaluation process, and continued governance training.
Consistent with our mutual agreement, please consider this letter notice pursuant to Section 10 of the MOU, effective March 26, 2012, of termination of the MOU between you, as Trustee of the Greenfield Union SD, and the State Board of Education. With the termination of this MOU, full authority for the governance of the Greenfield Union SD will return to the local governing board beginning on May 26, 2012.
Upon termination of this MOU, the Greenfield Union SD will be responsible for calculating your final paycheck based on your monthly compensation and expense allotment, as specified in the MOU, through May 25, 2012. As is required by Labor Code section 227.3, your final paycheck will also include payment for any annual leave days earned through May 25, 2012 that you have accrued but not yet used.
Again, on behalf of the State Board of Education, we thank you for all that you have accomplished in your two years of service.
Sincerely,
Michael W. Kirst (signed)
President
Susan K. Burr (signed)
Executive Director
cc: Patricia L. de Cos, Deputy Executive Director
      Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction
      Members, State Board of Education
      Nancy Kotowski, Monterey County Superintendent of Schools
      Maria Castillo, President, Greenfield Union SD
      Trevor McDonald, Superintendent, Greenfield Union SD
Download Free Readers
No comments:


“NEA IS Not Happy When You Publicly Disagree With THEM” 

Don't I Know...

Originally posted by Mike Antonucci March 25th, 2012,

There was a big stink over the weekend in Connecticut when Hartford Courant columnist Rick Green published an internal e-mail from Connecticut Education Association executive director Mary Loftus Levine. It read:


NEVER send anything to anyone until you send to Phil and me first. We spoke last night and we are not happy when you publicly disagree with us. AFT is playing you off against us, to get a deal. NO deal is always better than a bad one. From here on, I will be the spokesperson. If you want a caucus call one. While we appreciate all you do, you do not set policy, but rather advocate for our CEA positions. Now, if we disagree with what you sent we will let YOU know and you can send our changes as CEA’s. I will review later. Thank you. Also, if anyone attempts to contact you, please let me know immediately and refer them to me. Thanks again.


My first taste of NEA Democracy(?)
Two weeks previous to this statement, Randi Weingarten
pres for the AFT proclaimed, " a union must always be a democracy."



The “deal” referred to regards the ongoing negotiations between the teachers’ unions and Gov. Dannel Malloy over his teacher evaluation legislation. Once again the AFT in Connecticut is reported to be more willing to cooperate than is CEA.The first problem occurred because Green originally thought the memo had been sent to CEA members. Instead, it was an e-mail to a single CEA employee – apparently the union’s legislative coordinator – and inadvertently cc’ed to an entire listserv. I was unable to find any public statement that triggered the e-mail response.While Loftus Levine is justified to correct an employee whose opinions contradict company policy, (Bullshit! Randi Weingarten AFT said a union must be a democracy!) I’m amused at her substitution of ”our changes as CEA’s” (hers and those of CEA president Phil Apruzzese). I was under the impression – pounded into me by numerous union officers – that the members set policy through their representative bodies. (Not with CTA the California Equivelent to the CEA.) It is the job of the president to carry out those policies as spokesman for the organization. The executive director oversees the staff and has no policy-making function. That's just not the way it works in reality. It is also ironic that the executive director of a teachers’ union would address an employee as if he were a misbehaving child. What could be more undermining of a lobbyist’s status than to constantly get mommy’s permission?We all know real life isn’t like civics class, but the tolerate-no-dissent tone of CEA’s memo might help explain why teachers’ unions enjoy the PR image they do today. Sorry but I have to republish a memento from my personal CTA experience.Share

No comments: