Changes Afoot at School Boards

The Daily Journal did a nice survey of the candidate filings for the upcoming election.  B'game is in an off-year for Council, but the all important school board trustee ranks look like change is in the wind.  First, the caveat on timing

The filing deadline for local candidates was 5 p.m. Friday, Aug. 7, but will be extended until Wednesday, Aug. 12 if an incumbent declines to file for re-election. There may be a delay in getting information from city clerks to the Elections Office so the information on the roster posted Friday night may be incomplete.

So for each body, there is still the possibility of new candidates since:

In the Burlingame Elementary School District, incumbent Elizabeth Kendall has qualified for the ballot with Deepak Sarpangal and Lisa A. Mudd for three seats. Incumbents Davina Drabkin and Kay Coskey have not filed for re-election.

In the San Mateo Union High School District, finance executive Neal Kaufman, incumbent Greg Land and disability rights advocate Ligia Andrade Zuniga have qualifed for three seats. Incumbent Marc Friedman did not file for re-election.

I also don't want to lose this comment from a week ago on the other school post:

A member of the SMUHSD Board has their email account set up to automatically forward communications to the Superintendent.  (How do I know, the individual member (or the IT Department) failed in the set up and did not use the entire email address on the forward and it bounced back.  When sending a communication to the Board, the following should not be the response from the mailer-daemon.

"Your message wasn't delivered to skelly@smuhsd.org because the address couldn't be found, or is unable to receive mail."

Isn't the Board elected to represent the students, parents, and community? The Superintendent is an employee of the Board. So if a citizen sends a communication to the Board, then the item is automatically forwarded to the Superintendent with all of the writer's contact information?

This assertion really needs to be addressed--probably after the election.

Comments

[MBGA]

My brother left the state. I'm thinking about getting the hell out of my home state, born and raised, because life in a one party state will not be good for me and my type. A sinking California contemplates taxing former residents in some way. Not sure what they are thinking but I would imagine it would be fundamentally against the US Constitution. But the Constitution is open to interpretation. A lot of things can change overnight with a stacked court.

And there you have the essence of what is at stake in three weeks.

[GRDJR]

Grand jury report spurs San Mateo High School District community outcry
Parents and students call for policy reform following racist, hateful acts
By Austin Walsh Daily Journal staff 11 hrs ago 1
Community members urged swift and comprehensive policy reform in the wake of a grand jury spotlighting racism and hate in the San Mateo High School District.

Students and parents from local high schools raised concerns with the district’s response to racially-motivated attacks and other biased behavior during a school board meeting Thursday, Oct. 8.

[The Board is ignorant of the facts-LawClerk]

The Board is ignorant of the actions of its administration. These incidents have been covered up for the past few years.

Certain administrators are VERY aware but fear they will be terminated. Now they will be terminated as the damage spreads.

This is going to explode and it's going to get very ugly.

Read the Board comments in the SMDJ article. Except for Land, it's like nothing has happened. He is concerned because he is up for re-election.

The facts have been on the table for a long time. It's as easy as sticking your face in a book to see what is wrong.

Citizens seeking the Truth will easily see what is wrong.

There is a fear among lower level administrators that it THEY speak up, their career will be over.

A Black cloud has fallen over the SMUHSD, and its destroying safety and spirit of the students, parents, and community.

The adults ignored the issues. These concerns and complaints are now coming from the students themselves who are being damaged.

https://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/grand-jury-report-spurs-san-mateo-union-high-school-district-community-outcry/article_006629da-0c33-11eb-9614-6bfa8000bb61.html

[The Board is ignorant of the facts-LawClerk]

The Board is ignorant of the actions of its administration. These incidents have been covered up for the past few years.

Certain administrators are VERY aware but fear they will be terminated. Now they will be terminated as the damage spreads.

This is going to explode and it's going to get very ugly.

Read the Board comments in the SMDJ article. Except for Land, it's like nothing has happened. He is concerned because he is up for re-election.

The facts have been on the table for a long time. It's as easy as sticking your face in a book to see what is wrong.

Citizens seeking the Truth will easily see what is wrong.

There is a fear among lower level administrators that it THEY speak up, their career will be over.

A Black cloud has fallen over the SMUHSD, and its destroying safety and spirit of the students, parents, and community.

The adults ignored the issues. These concerns and complaints are now coming from the students themselves who are being damaged.

https://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/grand-jury-report-spurs-san-mateo-union-high-school-district-community-outcry/article_006629da-0c33-11eb-9614-6bfa8000bb61.html

[Follow the Money-DT]

The SMUHSD has spent $100,000's in legal and investigation expenses for issues where the Deputy Superintendent (who engaged in these issues) was covering up.

The leadership is continually wasting tax-payer's money, they allowed Burlingame High School to be destroyed, and then watched Principal Di Yim run off to Las Vegas in a post marital affair with another district office administrator.

The Board members enjoy the free healthcare and won’t risk it to go after the dead weight.

It's time for a purge.

The public needs full disclosure.

The administration is blocking information requests.

The legal and investigation expenses tell story.

The district will never be in the black with this type of behavior.

The Grand Jury Report is just the tip of the iceberg.

-Deep Throat

[Segregated Response-Grand Jury-Deflection-DT]

The SMUHSD's response to the Grand Jury Report HATE@Schools-

This is just another distraction...

The Levee is about to break.

SMUHSD Announces-
A Town Hall meeting for African American students and families-

So NOW the administration cares because the Grand Jury is investigating?

Would this Town Hall have happened without the Grand Jury?

The Grand Jury is NOT investigating Civil Rights Violations... they know they take place.

The Grand Jury is investigating the FAILURE of the administration to RESPOND to the actions.

"How are high school district staff and principals in San Mateo County responding to hate incidents or hate crimes occurring on campus?"-SM Grand Jury

Asking a single race or class to come to a meeting to describe the civil rights violations against it is just more shaming of that class.

How about the SMUHSD Board mandate an external investigation of its staff to find out problem.

"A fish rots from the head down." The Board knows where the problem lies, it just won't take action.

Tuesday, October 20 at 6:30 p.m. we will be having a Town Hall meeting

- Unity in the Community - focused on hearing from our African American families about ways we can improve experiences in our District and community.

We invited all students and families who identified themselves as African American or African American and another race.

http://www.sanmateocourt.org/documents/grand_jury/2019/hate_at_schools.pdf

[Joe]

Here are a couple of quotes from the DJ piece about the Board 5-0 vote to ask for a waiver to restart in-person transitional kindergarten thru 2nd grade on Jan. 20th.

I'm working backwards from the bottom of the piece since the bits that interest me most are there:

"The meeting also marked the last for Drabkin and board President Kay Coskey, who will be leaving the board and making way for new trustees Deepak Sarpangal and Lisa A. Mudd." As the original post notes, this was expected. There was no election since there were only two people seeking the two seats.

"In other business, the board examined district finances which projected deficit spending over the coming years. With spending outpacing income, a projection shared by Superintendent Christopher Mount-Benites anticipated a growing shortfall expected to reach $4 million by 2022-23....But with the financial shortfall expected to linger and enrollment projected to drop over the coming years, he offered a bleak assessment of the district’s position." It seems odd to project declining enrollment when we are on the verge of a massive number of new apartments and condos coming on-line in town and an exodus from SF. Bit of a head-scratcher.

You can click through for the details on the long Zoom discussion where the parents lined up for reopening

https://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/burlingame-plans-for-tk-2-students-return-to-schools/article_0581cbf6-3521-11eb-9c5c-bf39338cd68f.html#utm_source=smdailyjournal.com&utm_campaign=%2Fnewsletters%2Fheadlines%2F%3F-dc%3D1607007613&utm_medium=email&utm_content=headline

[Mr. Steele]

BSD submitted waiver to restart in person school.

Wavier was approved, however this has not been communicated to the BSD community.

When the BSD board discussed the waiver before they voted on it the message was that they would submit it to have in their back pocket and then will decide later if they would actually act upon it and have the kids return back to school. Now the tone is that it is a done deal and they will be having kids return to school in January. If this is all true I find it a bit sneaky as this decision was not discussed during the last board meeting nor in any communications.

If they have not yet decided if they are going to act on the approved waiver when will they? Or have we all been duped?

Perhaps there will have to be another Board Vote and since there are two new board members maybe the outcome will be different.

All the Board Members mentioned that is was a really tough decision and lots of going back and forth, this being said they all voted the same. If it was really that close, and if there was diversity among the board I have have expected the outcome to be different. I find this a bit odd.

[Mom]

Thank you for the update Mr. Steele. It feels a bit murky and I think that is your point. When is the next board meeting and when it the agenda for it expected?

[resident]

Smelling a rat here. The kids are gonna be Zooming for a long time unless the parents get very vocal.

[More Rats-]

What is the #1 factor in the failure to re-open schools?

The buildings and the schools are currently not safe to operate during COVID and the district does not want the public to know.

On December 17, the SMUHSD covertly transferred and rotated the Facilities Managers of the schools.

Who knows each campus and the site buildings better than anyone else?
The Facilities Manager of that site, who have now been transferred.

There could be many reasons for these moves, yet this is an utterly foolish move in the middle of a pandemic.

This is no different than abruptly rotating school site principals from one school to another.

The Facilities Managers run EVERYTHING on a campus. These folks are professionals and know their campus and buildings like the back of their hand. They also know where all the problems on the campus are located and as which HVAC systems Don’t Work.

These folks WERE the # 1 line of defense reopening a safe school. Now, each SMUHSD site has a Facilities Manager who is learning on the job at their new destination.

There was no prior notice given and these individuals, who are on the sites working each day. Their supervisor, Deputy Superintendent of Human Resources, Kirk Black did not even send them an email regarding the transfer. These trusted employees read about their own transfers in the board agenda.

These professionals are dedicated to their jobs and the crews that work for them. They keep our schools, teaches, and children safe. Shipping them off to another destination in the middle of the night does not project an environment of trust, honesty, or confidence.

Deputy Superintendent Black was brought on camera during the last meeting to specifically comment on personnel issues. Dr. Black, as always, said nothing to the Board about these critical moves.

Go to 1:52- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaeNBR1AMp4

The Board spent the meeting discussing its concerns of cybersecurity but no comments about the safety of re-opening the schools.

At a time when safety and confidence in our schools should be the #1 priority, the SMUHSD administration is at it again, hiding the items they do not want in plain view of the public.

The administration failed miserably in preparing an opening plan in August, bring in an alternative doctor to consult rather than an epidemiologist (who volunteered) and created a significant and hostile division among the community.

There have been no comments regarding the safety of the buildings or safeguards for the staff. The SMUHSD has been without a medical professional (nurse) on staff for almost two years, disregarding the medical needs of the students and staff

https://agendaonline.net/public/Meeting.aspx?AgencyID=126&MeetingID=81403&AgencyTypeID=1&IsArchived=False
Item O.1

[Joe]

And in other news, here is $115-125 million that could go towards upgrading HVAC, distancing fixtures, sanitizers, etc. INSTEAD of teacher housing:

https://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/crestmoor-campus-sold-for-125-million-in-san-bruno/article_bf949b66-41b2-11eb-aef4-4fa9ba9ade93.html

[T Bird]

Burlingame School Dist is having a board meeting next week,

agenda is

School Accountability Report Cards (SARC) - First Read
Champions Child Care Presentation
Resolutions ~ Adopting Prequalification Processes for MEP Subcontractors and Prime Contractors
BEA/BSD Sunshine Proposals

why isn't the wavier to return to school topic on the agenda. the waiver was submitted and approved however there has been no official published statement that they are going to act on it.

the party line was that they were going to submit it and once it is approved they would decided if and when to act on it. Its all been hush hush.

the Board is very disappointing , I feel sorry for the Superintendent to have inherited these clowns and this mess.

Most of the board members should step down. They are useless. They think they are serving the School community, they are not, they are serving their ego.

[Growling Tiger]

They are probably getting their groceries delivered because if they show up at Safeway or Lunardi's they will get an earful.

[T Bird]

BSD uses Curative for CVOID testing.

Curative is know for false negative results.

https://www.sfgate.com/coronavirus/article/COVID-19-test-sf-curative-inaccurate-results-15855602.php

[C Mendy]

Superintendent's Message

Please join us for BSD's Town Hall
What: Budget Presentation
When: Thursday, January 14, 2021
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Where: Zoom
Why: Budget has been a big topic in the state and the community as we move to address the significant shortfall faced by the district. Join us to learn more on this. For your reference, here is the presentation that will be reviewed Thursday night.
Sincerely,

Chris Mount-Benites
Superintendent

[C Mendy]

How did we get here?
•BSD has been running budget deficits for a number of years and mitigating to the best of our
ability. Our reserves are slowly being drawn down.
•The state requires a minimum of 3% reserves by law for the current year and two additional
years and BSD requires an additional 7% for a total of 10% (approximately 6-7 weeks of payroll)
•The budget adopted in June of 2020 for the ‘20-’21 school year was conditionally certified by the
county as our reserves would drop below the statutory minimum of 3% in the ‘21-’22 school
year with no available cash in ‘22-’23 (bankruptcy or “lack of going concern”)
• We have been able to improve our fiscal standing this year to be solvent with large structural deficits
through ‘22-’23 this year and bankruptcy pushed to ‘23-’24
•A school district gets to this point by not aligning expenditures appropriately with revenues
•Made worse by declining enrollment (revenues) while expenses continue to increase. Less
revenue in while expenses increase leads to a structural deficit.

[C Mendy]

It is a primary responsibility of a Board of
Trustees and the Superintendent to maintain
good financial standing and solvency.
What does a district have to do in order to get
out of deficit spending?
Spend Less.

[C Mendy]

Approaches to Deficit Reduction ($4.3M in ‘22-’23)
All at once ($4.3M): “rip the bandaid off” - take decisive action and remove all at once.
Advantages - a single painful period, immediate improvement in financial standing, long term
fiscal stability. Disadvantages – very disruptive (big deficit)
Year-by-Year Approach ($1.6M, $2.7M, $1.0M): Advantages - only reduce
the amount you absolutely have to year-to-year. Disadvantages - your reserves go down some
years, amount to reduce goes up, constant reductions are a “cloud hanging over a district”, takes
the focus off the education of our children, can do year-over-year damage to district culture
”Middle Way” ($3.3M): Do enough to return to fiscal solvency for 3-4 years and try to
take care of the difference through attrition and efficiency in the intervening years. Advantages
– Immediate improvement of financial standing, decisive but less potentially damaging, medium
term fiscal stability, room for maneuvering and compromise

[C Mendy]

as someone posted earlier they should sell Hoover. The site has the lowest enrollment and the property is worth the most. Since enrollment is low across the district this is a win win, just sprinkle the current Hoover students to other BD schools

[C Mendy]

to attend the meeting on 1/14 at 6pm contact Kirsten Diktakis the zoom information

kdiktakis@burlingameschools.org

[Mom]

What about the >expletive deleted< who is petitioning to change the name of BIS to RBG? Shouldn't RBG be the name of an abortion clinic instead of a middle school?

[Will Hunting]

The district administrations intentionally block and/or withhold information from Boards to either "buy time" or just hope the Board will not notice this issue.

Remember, the administrators get PAID and will lose their jobs over these issues if they are discovered as the negligence of the administrator.

Boards are often too friendly with administrations (we're in this together!) and therefor refuse to take appropriate actions when needed.

The issues at BSD are emerging and need full disclosure.

The issues at the SMUHSD are known and should result in the termination of some district administrators.

SMUHSD's Skelly stated in his last meeting, "I need to get better at presenting BAD NEWS." (Like we really don't have a plan to open the schools because we have been lying to the Board all along....)

[Just Visiting]

>expletive deleted< is a nice way to refer to a neighbor with whom you have a political disagreement. Way to turn the rhetoric down.

Don't worry, it's not as though rhetoric has consequences.

FWIW (which I'm sure is virtually nothing), I don't support renaming BIS after RBG.

[Editor]

JV, I agree with you and have edited both instances of the expletive. Let's make our points without the pointed edge.