This truly is a disturbing lack of transparency, combined with a “round up the usual suspects” approach to staffing the committee which guarantees that (as you point out) the typical taxpayer has no real voice on it.

And then they have the audacity to brag about how great a process it is. As you have said in the past, the shameless prevailing over the spineless.

At the risk of sounding cynical, most “strategic planning” just tells those in charge what they want to hear. In other words, horse pucky! Anyone who expects anything more than that is delusional.

EDITOR’S NOTE: True “strategic planning” is vital to the growth and improvement of an organization.

But you are correct if you are suggesting that D-64’s version is nothing more than a Kabuki performance orchestrated to create the appearance of strategic planning which, in reality, is little more than a charade for basically doing business as usual.

Interestingly, this Board is headed by one Dr. Borelli–a candidate who recently won re-election for another four-year term, with the endorsement of this editor (albeit a tepid one). Surely, he could have shed some “transparency” but chose (for whatever reason) not to. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Hence, the “tepid” endorsement.

Whether Borrelli just doesn’t “get” transparency – intuitively and organically – or whether he just doesn’t have the guts to insist on it day in and day out, is troubling. But this is another one of those times since he became Board president where he has figuratively stood at the plate with the bat on his shoulder watching fat strikes go by.

It truly is sad that in times like these, when he could actually show some leadership, he reveals himself as either over his skis or more the problem than the solution.

Having volunteered for many similar type of committees in the past the lack of community involvement -heck even parent and or teacher involvement is due to a lack of individuals willing to do a thankless job. There is a reason it is the usual suspects – no one else steps up.

Sometimes there really isn’t a conspiracy.

EDITOR’S NOTE: That’s just plain horsebleep.

When a committee purportedly intended to provide “community involvement” is manipulated so that 82% of its members are special interests – teachers, administrators, parents of current students and members of the local education establishment (former teachers, administrators and school board members) – that just smells like a week old carp in a paper bag under the summer sun. And like any rotten fish, it stinks from the head down.

If D-64 gave a fig about transparency and the credibility of this process, it would have published a list of the names of EVERYBODY who asked to be put on this committee – in advance of the selection process – so that (a) anybody who applied but whose name was not listed could correct the oversight; and (b) the public could have an opportunity to support or object to any of the applicants for cause.

But then D-64 couldn’t get away with selecting the usual suspects while having its toadies anonymously claim that “no one else step[ped] up.”

The idea that neither of these two shows was at 7:00 p.m. or later is ridiculous, considering that the D64 Board doesn’t start its own meetings until 7:00 p.m. So why no 7:00 show?

Will at least a video of one of these be on the D64 website so people like me can watch it?

EDITOR’S NOTE: We understand that neither session was videotaped.

Which demonstrates, once again, that the “educators” at D-64 don’t want these dog-and-pony shows videotaped so they can be witnessed by more folks than can show up before 7:00 p.m. on a Wednesday night, just like they didn’t want Board meetings videotaped until private citizens shoved it down their throats.

And our elected “representatives” on the School Board simply rubber-stamp whatever the “educators” want.

I am sorry PD. This just drives me freakin’ crazy!!!!! I know about the cancer vs heart disease lecture but come on!!!

You endorsed the guy and a bit over one week after the election with nothing at all changed since you chose to endorse him you say:

“It truly is sad that in times like these, when he could actually show some leadership, he reveals himself as either over his skis or more the problem than the solution”.

What “truly is say” is that this is what you say about a person that you encouraged PR voters to put in office for another 4 years.

EDITOR’S NOTE: When the only two alternatives are a PREA-recruited candidate and another candidate who the PREA claims sought its endorsement – with the latter, judging by yard signs, becoming PREA-endorsed once the PREA’s other candidate got tossed off the ballot – yes, we endorsed Borrelli. And, yes, it is extremely disappointing when Borrelli lets a process like this one, more opaque than transparent, go forward with his express or tacit endorsement.

Is he capable of raising his game? With every one of these SNAFUs we become less optimistic. But since we’re unaware of any recall process for getting rid of inept and/or feckless board members, we’ll just have to hope for the best – and keep calling him and the other dwarves out when they pull shots like this.

“But since we’re unaware of any recall process for getting rid of inept and/or feckless board members,we’ll just have to hope for the best……”

Now you long for a recall process?!??!?! days after you endorsed him it’s this? Vote for Borelli……what a shame there is not recall process. BAAAHHHHH!!!!

EDITOR’S NOTE: If you go back and re-read what we wrote – go ahead, move your lips if need be, we won’t mind – you will see that we did not say that we “long for a recall process.” We simply pointed out that since there is none, we have to hope that Borrelli eventually figures out what “transparency” and “accountability” mean – as well as grasping the concept that school board members aren’t supposed to be rubber stamps of the administration, or mere potted plants.

7:01:

Give me a break!! All PR had a chance to voice their opinion on 4/7. Election day. Everyone was aware of it well in advance. You had all year or years to register. You had two freakin’ weeks of early voting in case 4/7 was a bad day for you. On the actual day the polls were open from well before work to well after work and all day long. No lines no waiting. Over 85% of the people did not even show up…..period. I would also bet many who are of age are not even registered.

So let’s no act as if their is this huge mass of people soooooo put out by the timing of these meetings. Like it would have been packed if the meetings were at 7PM…..please!!!

Did you register a complaint?? Did you stand up at a school board meeting and demand that the timing of some of these meetings be changed?? NOPE! Hell, I would bet that had PD not posted about it you and most others would have not made a peep as the meeting went by.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Don’t change the topic: 7:01’s comment isn’t about the last election, it’s about transparency by a local governmental body in forming a committee to devise a “strategic plan” for spending in excess of $70 million a year of the taxpayers’ money over the next five years (i.e., $350 million-plus).

We elect school board members to, among other things, look out for the taxpayers’ interest and prevent the well-paid bureaucrats from doing whatever they want, with however much of our money they want to spend, to whatever effect they choose. If every taxpayer has to constantly look over these elected officials’ shoulders, then these elected officials aren’t doing their jobs.

Timing of these events for when stay-at-home parents are feeding kids supper and when working parents are still trying to get back to the house sure looks intentional.

EDITOR’S NOTE: You mean because D-64 doesn’t hold its regular board meetings at 4:30 or 6:00 p.m.?

This is the same kind of problem PW wrote about on 7/7/14 when Bob Johnson was appointed to the school board and the names of the possible appointees weren’t released until the day the D-64 board chose Johnson. And no bio material about any of them, so no opportunity for voters to comment. At least they are consistent.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Leopards don’t change their spots.

I think a strategic plan is a good idea, but they screw it up when they seem to be playing games with the taxpayers who don’t have any kids in D64 schools and are counting on the quality of the schools to help maintain their property values. I guess that’s what D64 means by “for the kids” because that’s all it’s for, although not doing so much for them, either.

The only way that strategic plan committee would be fair is if taxpayers with no kids and no association with D64 (especially parochial school parents) comprised half of it.

Regarding C squared’s comment: does only half our taxpayers have children in public school?
Also I note that despite calls to service on other issues very few people volunteer for such committee with the school system park district or city government. In fact it usually ends up being a relatively small group of the same volunteers
In fact people in town show such apathy that elections -like the recent one- are decided by a small percentage of voters who show the initiative to vote during the WEEKS that voting is open. Similar apathy resulted in certain alderman writing himself into office cause no one else stepped up.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Far less than “half our taxpayers have chldren in public schools.” And a decent number of them have never had children in public schools. Where is THEIR representation on the Strategic Planning Steering Committee? There is none.

As for your contention that “very few people volunteer for such committee[s],” D-64’s non-transparency prevents that from being known. Instead of D-64 posting the names of all the applicants for that committee so that the public would know who they were BEFORE the choices were made, the D-64 Board and staff pulled their typical Star Chamber manuver and did it all in secret – not even revealing the names of the “chosen” until weeks after the choices were made, on the day the draft report was being presented.

It’s not even “non-transparency” but more like “anti-transparency.”