I think everyone in the room was anticipating a big showdown, perhaps something ugly, certainly something heated.
In fact, I flash back to the original Valley Oak meeting, when the decision was made to close the school, because it sheds light on the contrast of styles. At that time it was Interim Superintendent Richard Whitmore's first meeting and he sat back and allowed his staff to make their presentations, to set the tone for the meeting, and then he made some comments.
Flash forward to last night, new Superintendent James Hammond was first to speak. All week long we had read in the papers the staff report, the lawyer's report, and we were prepared for the worst. But James Hammond took control of this meeting. Instead of having staff present their report, instead of allowing them to set the tone for the meeting, something very different happened.
James Hammond spoke in very general terms and then suggested that they had options, that they did not have to make a decision this evening. And that gave Board President Jim Provenza, in his last meeting, the opening that he needed. And he suggested that if it were possible that the district could meet with the petitioners and that they could hash out their differences.
So instead of conflict from the start, the tone was set that compromise and reconciliation was a possibility and the rest of the board to their credit followed this lead.
Outgoing member Keltie Jones said that if we were going to do this, the best opportunity to succeed would be to work out the differences together. And she acknowledge that many of the issues were small things, although some were large things.
Mike Egan, one of the drafters of the petition, was asked his feelings and he said from the start that they had wanted to sit down and talk through the differences.
According to law, they have 60 from the date they submitted the petition to make a decision on the petition. That would put the 60th day at January 4. However, by mutual consent they can extend that another 30 days. Mr. Egan was not unwilling to extend that deadline but suggested he would also like to see progress.
Should the school board reject the charter proposal there is ample recourse for the petitioners. First, it would go to the county board of education and then the state.
Gina Daleiden also made a good suggestion that each of the board members express their concerns to the district and the petitioners so that these issues can ultimately be addressed.
Tim Taylor was very agreeable to that suggestion and also agreeable to the idea of working out the differences because a rush decision would leave a lot of unhappy people and probably a number of unresolved questions.
For Tim Taylor as for Gina Daleiden the number of students who would attend and if few attended, the viability of the program given the size was the biggest concern.
Julie Cuetara, a parent, PTA president, and school mascot, addressed this point very well later on. First of all, this was not a reason that they could deny the charter. She also pointed out that the state law only required them to gather half the petitions for the projected students. The general belief was that students would come eventually, however, Ms. Cuetara also suggested that they gathered those petitions in a short period of time and she felt that she could collect 400 or 500 if needed.
Sheila Allen wanted to see some of the details such as special education and fiscal services fleshed out. She wanted to see MOU's (Memorandum of Understanding) not necessarily signed, but at least general points spelled out.
Jim Provenza spoke last. He was appreciative of the work of James Hammond and suggested that he will work in good faith. He thanked the Charter School Proponents for their good and hard work and then spoke in general terms about some of the key programs at Valley Oak. He wanted to preserve the uniqueness of the school, he talked about how special and effective the EL program is, and he urged creativity and cooperation on both sides and suggested that this flexibility can keep this unique school open. He said this is not about lawyers or administrators or even board members, but rather about kids in a school.
James Hammond really took the lead here and suggested good faith efforts to come to an agreement. Such efforts that did not seem possible this week given the tone of the reports coming from staff.
Fred Buderi, one of the leaders from the Davis OPEN group spoke during public comment about his concern about the tone of the staff report but also emphatically said he was very encouraged by comments from the board and superintendent, particularly about having good faith discussions.
Freddie Oakley, the Yolo County Clerk/ Recorder, also spoke during public comment, she gave an impassioned speech about duty, morality, and values. She emphatically told the board and the district to do the right thing (keep Valley Oak open and approve the petition) but also to do it with due diligence.
However, I come back to Superintendent James Hammond now. Because during the course of this week, really just since Sunday, the rhetoric was increasing and Fred Buderi was exactly right, the tone of the staff reports were very negative and divisive.
People on the blog even suggested that the Superintendent had not said anything. They suggested that this was very telling. It is actually fairly typical that his staff draft staff reports, not the Superintendent himself. However, once James Hammond came forward and took the lead on this issue, the tone and rhetoric changed.
There was no doubt during this meeting who was in control, who had set the tone, and who was not very happy about it. A number of people remarked to me about Associate Superintendent Ginni Davis, the author of the resolution. Her body language was atrocious. To the point where people who did not know who she was, were very angry at her and asked me who that was. She was literally writhing in her seat during the time in which James Hammond spoke and difused the situation. She was clearly not happy. Frankly her body language, probably off-camera from those at home, bordered on insubordination.
Staff was used to running the show under previous administrations, but there was no doubt who ran this show. The entire course of this debate changed in the first five minutes, when James Hammond instead allowing the staff report to be presented per the usual, instead, talked about options that the board had to either approve, reject, take no action, or allow staff and charter petitioners to work it out.
Now that the tone has been set and the gauntlet thrown down by the Dr. Hammond that these will occur in good faith, we can sit back and watch to see it unfold. However, one thing I take away from this is how important a strong and confident leader is to this entire process. It was a subtle manner in which Dr. Hammond seized control of this but it is a model that all Superintendents, Chiefs of Staff, City Managers, etc. should look at when their boards are on the brink of a divisive and heated discussion. For the first time, I see why the board decided that James Hammond was the guy for this job, and for the first time, I hope that maybe, just maybe, things are going to get better.
---Doug Paul Davis reporting
In fact, I flash back to the original Valley Oak meeting, when the decision was made to close the school, because it sheds light on the contrast of styles. At that time it was Interim Superintendent Richard Whitmore's first meeting and he sat back and allowed his staff to make their presentations, to set the tone for the meeting, and then he made some comments.
Flash forward to last night, new Superintendent James Hammond was first to speak. All week long we had read in the papers the staff report, the lawyer's report, and we were prepared for the worst. But James Hammond took control of this meeting. Instead of having staff present their report, instead of allowing them to set the tone for the meeting, something very different happened.
James Hammond spoke in very general terms and then suggested that they had options, that they did not have to make a decision this evening. And that gave Board President Jim Provenza, in his last meeting, the opening that he needed. And he suggested that if it were possible that the district could meet with the petitioners and that they could hash out their differences.
So instead of conflict from the start, the tone was set that compromise and reconciliation was a possibility and the rest of the board to their credit followed this lead.
Outgoing member Keltie Jones said that if we were going to do this, the best opportunity to succeed would be to work out the differences together. And she acknowledge that many of the issues were small things, although some were large things.
Mike Egan, one of the drafters of the petition, was asked his feelings and he said from the start that they had wanted to sit down and talk through the differences.
According to law, they have 60 from the date they submitted the petition to make a decision on the petition. That would put the 60th day at January 4. However, by mutual consent they can extend that another 30 days. Mr. Egan was not unwilling to extend that deadline but suggested he would also like to see progress.
Should the school board reject the charter proposal there is ample recourse for the petitioners. First, it would go to the county board of education and then the state.
Gina Daleiden also made a good suggestion that each of the board members express their concerns to the district and the petitioners so that these issues can ultimately be addressed.
Tim Taylor was very agreeable to that suggestion and also agreeable to the idea of working out the differences because a rush decision would leave a lot of unhappy people and probably a number of unresolved questions.
For Tim Taylor as for Gina Daleiden the number of students who would attend and if few attended, the viability of the program given the size was the biggest concern.
Julie Cuetara, a parent, PTA president, and school mascot, addressed this point very well later on. First of all, this was not a reason that they could deny the charter. She also pointed out that the state law only required them to gather half the petitions for the projected students. The general belief was that students would come eventually, however, Ms. Cuetara also suggested that they gathered those petitions in a short period of time and she felt that she could collect 400 or 500 if needed.
Sheila Allen wanted to see some of the details such as special education and fiscal services fleshed out. She wanted to see MOU's (Memorandum of Understanding) not necessarily signed, but at least general points spelled out.
Jim Provenza spoke last. He was appreciative of the work of James Hammond and suggested that he will work in good faith. He thanked the Charter School Proponents for their good and hard work and then spoke in general terms about some of the key programs at Valley Oak. He wanted to preserve the uniqueness of the school, he talked about how special and effective the EL program is, and he urged creativity and cooperation on both sides and suggested that this flexibility can keep this unique school open. He said this is not about lawyers or administrators or even board members, but rather about kids in a school.
James Hammond really took the lead here and suggested good faith efforts to come to an agreement. Such efforts that did not seem possible this week given the tone of the reports coming from staff.
Fred Buderi, one of the leaders from the Davis OPEN group spoke during public comment about his concern about the tone of the staff report but also emphatically said he was very encouraged by comments from the board and superintendent, particularly about having good faith discussions.
Freddie Oakley, the Yolo County Clerk/ Recorder, also spoke during public comment, she gave an impassioned speech about duty, morality, and values. She emphatically told the board and the district to do the right thing (keep Valley Oak open and approve the petition) but also to do it with due diligence.
However, I come back to Superintendent James Hammond now. Because during the course of this week, really just since Sunday, the rhetoric was increasing and Fred Buderi was exactly right, the tone of the staff reports were very negative and divisive.
People on the blog even suggested that the Superintendent had not said anything. They suggested that this was very telling. It is actually fairly typical that his staff draft staff reports, not the Superintendent himself. However, once James Hammond came forward and took the lead on this issue, the tone and rhetoric changed.
There was no doubt during this meeting who was in control, who had set the tone, and who was not very happy about it. A number of people remarked to me about Associate Superintendent Ginni Davis, the author of the resolution. Her body language was atrocious. To the point where people who did not know who she was, were very angry at her and asked me who that was. She was literally writhing in her seat during the time in which James Hammond spoke and difused the situation. She was clearly not happy. Frankly her body language, probably off-camera from those at home, bordered on insubordination.
Staff was used to running the show under previous administrations, but there was no doubt who ran this show. The entire course of this debate changed in the first five minutes, when James Hammond instead allowing the staff report to be presented per the usual, instead, talked about options that the board had to either approve, reject, take no action, or allow staff and charter petitioners to work it out.
Now that the tone has been set and the gauntlet thrown down by the Dr. Hammond that these will occur in good faith, we can sit back and watch to see it unfold. However, one thing I take away from this is how important a strong and confident leader is to this entire process. It was a subtle manner in which Dr. Hammond seized control of this but it is a model that all Superintendents, Chiefs of Staff, City Managers, etc. should look at when their boards are on the brink of a divisive and heated discussion. For the first time, I see why the board decided that James Hammond was the guy for this job, and for the first time, I hope that maybe, just maybe, things are going to get better.
---Doug Paul Davis reporting
