Patch Letter: Word War Between Board President, Critic Rages On

Although she didn’t use my name, I admit that I am the “ex-board” member that Governing Board Susan Boyd threatened to in the LCF Patch.

My offense? I persistently asked questions and wrote several “opinion” articles about the District and from the 2011/12 school year to provide more teacher collaboration days. I pointed out that we already had 5 pupil-free days to support teachers and that adding 4 more days means that 5% of all school days have no students. I am not the only person who has asked such questions, which seem very reasonable to me.

I also questioned the District giving a no-bid $6,500 per month plus expenses contract to TBWB Strategies, a marketing company, to conduct a survey. The survey’s purpose is to see if LCF voters will pass a second parcel tax, just two years after we passed our first one to save school programs. I also questioned the District action, with Board approval, to backdate payment to TBWB to a date before the contract was signed. Again, these seem like reasonable questions, especially given our schools need to save every possible dollar and a highly competitive marketplace for many services.

Mrs. Boyd accuses me of telling “half-truths” and using “sucker punches.”

First let me say that I stand by all written or verbal statements I have made regarding this issue. Second, a Governing Board President using [her] title to personally disparage any member of the public in such a manner is irresponsible, especially when their own facts are incorrect. Mrs. Boyd inaccurately writes that the poll conducted by LCF parent Daniel Lidar asking if the community supported the cut in school days, had fewer than 70 replies. But Lidar unequivocally and with written evidence, says that the number was 167, documented on the web site, lcusd.wordpress.com. Lidar handed Boyd that report at a public meeting last July, where parents had gathered to protest the cut days. The results, more than 75% of respondents were in favor of returning those 4 days to students.

Accusing me of not getting my facts right, when she incorrectly reports information from a written report handed to her at a public meeting, and accessible for months on a web site, is inexcusable, especially from an elected Governing Board president. Regarding half-truths, Boyd fails to mention that more than 700 senior households have exempted themselves from the current parcel tax and that our high school recently encouraged students to attend Disneyland during the cut days as a club fundraiser.

The Governing Board President represents all board members, the Superintendent, and our schools. Yet as is clear from Mrs. Wilcox’s comments in the LCF Patch, Mrs. Boyd failed to share her negative letter with all board members before sending it to the local media. However offended she may feel, “punching back” is not the type of attitude or behavior we teach to our children. Nor does “punching back” support the Board’s own core values, to “maintain strong, open and proactive communication between and among all stakeholders,” and “promote a culture of mutual respect and professionalism among all stakeholders.”

Finally, if this is indeed a punching match, then Boyd and the Board struck the first blow by cutting 4 days from the school year, behind closed doors during teacher negotiations and without parent input. They have won every round to date, refusing to return those days to students and paying a survey company $6,500 a month plus expenses to see if the community will agree to a second parcel tax. The big question now is whether or not they will deliver a knock-out punch and again cut those days for students next year.

Readers who would like more detailed information should visit lcusd.wordpress.com.

Ronald Dietel
LCF