November 10, 2009
I’ve had almost a week to get used to the idea that I won’t be involved with schools other than as a parent. I’ve had a great many people express their disappointment and sadness over my outcome and I appreciate the sentiments. Sad as it was for me, however, it’s over and the fat lady has sung. It is now time to move on, but not before I share some last thoughts that are important to me and, I believe, to the district.
Proposed Board Policy 5113 (Excused Absences for Confidential Medical Treatment): I am sure there are some who believe this policy was my undoing because I expressed approval of allowing students to receive an excused absence from school should they need to seek legal confidential medical treatment. Many people spoke out against this policy and expressed a multitude of reasons it should not be approved. If everyone were completely honest, I think the dissenters would ultimately admit they opposed the policy because they don’t think teenagers should be sexually active and allowing them an excused absence to seek reproductive health services indicates tacit, if not active, approval. This is not, however, the stated reason people gave for their opposition. The reasons given were students shouldn’t be making medical appointments of any kind during school hours (though it happens all the time), it interfered with parent’s rights (though minors can legally seek treatment in the State of California without parent’s knowledge or consent already), and the school has no right to take my child in for a medical appointment without my knowledge (which was a completely preposterous statement and never a part of the policy). The reasons were numerous, the discussion was heated and the outcome was less than satisfactory. The losers in this argument were students who need advice and treatment from medical professionals at a time when they may not have anyone else to turn to. The teen pregnancy and STD rates in Stanislaus County are high. One’s belief that teenagers shouldn’t be sexually active is all but irrelevant, because a great many of them are. Anyone who is opposed to abortion should logically support access to birth control and anyone who cares about children should be pro-medical treatment for STD’s. Certainly when a teenager commits suicide, it is one too many, and I would think responsible adults would be clamoring to allow access to mental health professionals when young people are suffering from depression or because of substance abuse, sexual assault or relationship violence.
A thought about future budget cuts: One of the things I mentioned as worthy of examination in regard to possible budget savings was district employee health insurance. Even though I mentioned it briefly and didn’t really get into the specifics, I had some anxious response to bringing up the subject at all. When I mentioned it, there were apparently people who thought I wanted to eliminate district-sponsored health insurance which was not the case. However, here’s the rub: several years ago, the negotiators from the MTA and district officials discussed rolling health insurance benefits into salaries. This was a very desirable perk at the time; it passed muster with the board and teachers and managers received the benefit. Essentially, what this meant was that certificated staff and managers received a pay increase ostensibly to pay for their health insurance coverage whether they received coverage through the district or not. When I asked about how many employees take coverage through the district, I was told approximately 65% while the remaining 35% had coverage through a spouse or partner. I think it would be worthwhile to determine what the cost savings to the district would be with a traditional health insurance package where employees take the insurance as a benefit rather than a salary increase. Employees would have access to health insurance but those who were covered by a spouse or partner would not cost the district additional money. Granted, this would be an unpopular suggestion and would have to be negotiated with the Modesto Teacher’s Association and the managers, but it could represent a substantial savings. It would also demonstrate how serious the Association leadership and district employees are about keeping budget cuts as far from the classroom as possible.
Superintendent Arturo Flores: Much has been made of the perceived “lack of leadership” at the board level and the relationships board members have with the Superintendent. Somehow, it has been assumed that agreement with the Superintendent on strategies, policies and programs equates to something inherently wrong or irresponsible. I can honestly say I favored hiring Mr. Flores as the superintendent because I liked his ideas, his openness, his concern for children and his drive to improve the academic excellence of the district. None of that changed as I watched him take on his responsibilities and perform his job. If I disagreed with something he did, said or asked for, I would certainly say so as I did when I voted against last year’s package of budget cuts. However, if I agreed with the proposal, project, policy or contract, should I have voted against some of them just to prove I wasn’t in the Superintendent’s “hip pocket”? Apparently, some feel that’s what I should have done, but at least this way, I have a clear conscience and can say I performed my duties in a way consistent with my beliefs and values. I believe in the direction the Superintendent is taking the district and wish him the best for as long as he chooses to stay with Modesto City Schools. I hope he can garner more support for the strategic plan, for his quest for educational equity for all our students and the care he shows for children.
There are additional thoughts and ideas that have come to me over the course of the last week, but these are the issues I felt it was important to relate. I will continue to write in this space, though I will probably change the name of the blog, for obvious reasons. I look forward to future opportunities and to sharing thoughts and rants with all of you. Please check back periodically and post a comment. I’d love to hear from you!
Well said.
You know I supported you- and appreciate that even though you lost- you stood by your principles- which were also in the best interest of the kids. I only hope we have someone left on the board who remembers that not all kids come from 2 parent, “loving, Christian” families- there are many out who need the Board to set policy for their benefit-enjoy “just being a parent”!
When I read your words, I hear your voice in my head. It is filled with love and compassion for the students, as it should be. The Modesto City Schools community has no idea what they have lost.
I am glad to read you will be continuing this blog. I will keep reading it and continue encourage everyone to read your insightful words.