School Board Candidate Garrett Goebel Launches Website
Decatur Metro | | 9:58 amEmily notes that Garrett Goebel, school board candidate in District 1 and the man who helped keep DM commenters honest during the reconfiguration effort, has launched a website supporting his candidacy.
At the site, you can learn Garrett’s platform, read his bio (including a list of volunteer efforts), endorse Garrett and donate to the campaign.
Oh and don’t miss the pic of Garrett getting down in the mud, building what I can only assume is a castle wall in his yard!
One of Garrett’s many assets is that he has taken the time to understand the CSD budget and fiscal situation, including projections about different reconfiguration options. He runs the numbers given stated assumptions and then, if he doesn’t understand why his projections differ from the published ones, takes the time to meet with CSD staff to reconcile the numbers. I’ve even seen him change his position on particular decisions based on what he learned while thoroughly studying and understanding the budget.
In addition, he’s thoughtful, sensible, reasonable, well-informed on educational methods and child development, quite involved with his children’s schools, and concerned with equity for all children.
Wow. Thank you.
Hey thanks for the plug!
What you see in the picture you reference, is me moving one of the final blocks of 8 tons of granite from our driveway to temporary storage in the backyard. It came from the foundation of a house rebuilt by Eric Sullivan. Once we get an excavator in the back yard, I’ll be building dry stone terraced retaining walls. Granite can be up to 140lbs per cubic foot. Makes for a strong back or a very sore one
I’d love to hear from people about what is working well in our City Schools, and where there is room for improvement.
We’ve got a lot of potential challenges ahead of us with rising enrollments and annexation. We have kids in trailers. We have reconfiguration for the second time in 5 years. The economy is uncertain. It is important that we spend our resources wisely and with a flexible long term vision so that we can keep improving our great schools. I promise to listen, dig in, ask questions, and do my best for Decatur.
1142 individuals voted in District 1 during the last municipal election. Decatur is certainly a prime example of Democracy in America. Every vote counts.
Please vote for me on November 3rd.
If you’re on Facebook, you can head over to my page http://www.facebook.com/pages/Get-Garrett-for-Decatur-School-Board-District-1/156527483901, where you can add yourself as a supporter, chat with me on my wall, and follow my experiences on the campaign trail.
Sorry, Garret but it seems as though your Facebook link isn’t working. Well, not for me anyway.
Should work now Chad.
DM, I think there were quite a lot of folks keeping the reconfig effort honest — I don’t think you should give all the credit to Garrett.
You couldn’t be more right. Reconfiguration is a very complicated issue with many trade-offs and no clear cut answers.
Thomas, Theresa, Susan, Gene and all the others at the Central Office did an amazing job of gathering the data together in a presentable form. Lew Lefton did a tremendous job writing up the collective experience of the Reconfiguration Committee, provided the vote tallying methodology, and in getting the information and data out to people as early as possible. -Which made review of the issue by the larger community possible.
Paul Duda and Gabriel Ramirez never stopped trying to find better options. All the principals, teachers, and parents involved in the Reconfiguration issue did a tremendous amount of work in a very short time. And outside the Reconfiguration Committee there were a lot of smart invested parents who were following along and influencing the outcome.
I think given the time scale, the effort, and the success in reaching a consensus we should trumpet the reconfiguration committee as an example of how community involvement can work. And we should recognize and thank Dr. Edwards for embracing it.
I didn’t say that Garrett kept the reconfiguation honest. I said that he kept US (DM readers) honest during the process, condensing large amounts of data into a digestable format. Do you debate that point?
Nope, I don’t dispute that. You can forget I mentioned it.
No way. I appreciate that you called me out on it, since I probably wasn’t as clear as I should have been. I’ve revised the wording in the original post a bit so there’s no confusion.
I see what you meant now. At first I took it in a way that suggested the process might have been dishonest otherwise, but that was my mistake, and my reply wasn’t as well worded as it should have been. I’d take down my original reply if I could.
Thanks for all your work, DM!
I’d like to raise a subject for discussion now that Garrett’s put his positions out there.
Both Garrett’s and Rob Pope’s announcements have involved comments by both themselves and others about how much time and energy they’ve invested into really understanding the issues associated with running our school system. This is to be commended. Anyone unfamiliar with the big picture is ill-equipped to make any serious decisions, as well-intentioned efforts in one realm may have negative consequences in another. Understanding how all the pieces fits together is a full-time, hugely complicated endeavor. Again, it sounds like Rob and Garrett have both applied an appropriate level of study and I think that’s great.
Which leads me to ask why both are pushing greater surveying of parents in decision-making. I’m a CSD parent, I’m involved in my child’s education, I do my best to pay attention to the issues and form opinions, and there is *no way* I would trust myself to be making decisions that affect everyone. That is, I recognize that even a fairly diligent parent such as myself is nowhere near informed enough in the big picture to be leading change, so why would I want other parents — equally struggling to stay abreast of everything while managing everyday life — taking the lead on how we educate our kids?
Leadership is about leading. Generals don’t turn to Privates to establish policy.
Add to that that surveying is easily manipulated by special interests and often unreliable without great care in its administration and I’m really having a hard time with this line of thinking. In my experience, loose surveying is more often a tool for political ass-covering than anything else.
Right now, we’re working towards good channels where one’s level of influence is determined by how close they are to the problem. The leadership teams, for example, require the time and energy of involvement on the part of the member parents, so I’m far more comfortable with their counsel than I am with parents in my boat. If we have a problem with how much voice our leadership teams have, we should address that problem specifically rather than disempowering them by acting as though every opinion has equal value.
Too long, I know, but this issue’s been nagging at me and I was curious how other parents felt. Should everyone have an equal voice in how we move forward or should there be a recognition that many of our issues are far larger than many people’s time/energy allows a solid grasp of?
When I support surveys, I am not suggesting that School Board issues should be resolved by a community vote. Surveys are not a magic silver bullet. Surveys should not set policy.
I’m also not suggesting that surveys supersede the authority of School Leadership Teams (SLTs). There are systemic issues like Reconfiguration which are rightly decided by the Board. And there are issues of local school governance which are best decided by the SLTs. I want to see the governing role of SLTs grow.
Speaking directly to the issue of surveys. -Just because Generals don’t turn to Privates to set policy doesn’t mean they shouldn’t listen to them. After all, the first rule for young Lieutenants is: Lieutenants need to listen to their Sergeants… Lieutenants need to listen to their Sergeants… Lieutenants need to listen to their Sergeants.
Surveys provide insight into where the community at large stands on an issue. If I listen to the community and know when there is a significant difference between my perspective and the others that are out there, then I can engage those people. I can reason with them and try to bring them around to my way of thinking. Or as can also happen… I may come around to their way of thinking. -Or meet them halfway. If I’m not listening, I’m not learning.
Surveys are also important because when people are involved in a process, they are more likely to accept the outcome of the process. -When the City Schools surveyed teacher opinions on reconfiguration, but failed to survey parents or the community at large, we effectively snubbed parents and the community. Internet technologies make it very easy to put out surveys. The Decatur library provides Internet access to those who don’t have it at home.
Hierarchies of communication and command are a good thing. They support top-down management styles very well. But they can also be cumbersome and inefficient. Not everyone who is close to the problems of significance are sitting at the table. -Or are necessarily within the web of trust of someone who is.
The rules by which our governing bodies operate do not allow for dialog during public meetings. In addition to surveys, I would like to see regular round table or town hall meetings. Due to the Open Meetings requirements, decisions could not be made at them. But we could take questions and answers. We can do better at staying connected with and engaging the community.
Fair enough. Clearly we’re on opposite sides of the issue!
Let me provide an example that demonstrates my reticence. Assume there’s a potential sizable action being considered by the school board. Say it’s one that’s without question in the best interest of the school system overall. But let’s also say it without question inconveniences the residents of Neighborhood A far more so than anyone else in the city.
A survey is issued. Responses citywide are within statistical norms but the angry residents of Neighborhood A swamp the survey with their dissatisfaction. The numbers add up against the proposal.
To me, that leaves two choice: Use the survey as the guide and vote against the proposal, which is not in the best interest of the community overall or vote in the best interest of the community overall, opening the system to criticism that the survey was a “sham” because the board went against its results.
I agree when you say “when people are involved in a process, they are more likely to accept the outcome of the process” but that’s only true when they have meaningful involvement. In my mind, the above scenario illustrates an instance where people would participate and then feel their participation had no effect, further galvanizing their opposition. That’s something to be wary of, IMO.
Don’t take this as anything more than productive discussion of the issue. If you refer back to my original post, I think you’ll see I made more than a little effort to begin by praising your efforts and involvement. My concern is not informed people such as yourself. It’s those who are not informed.
I have to agree with Scott and put myself in the camp that is not all too impressed with candidates calling for more surveys. We elect our public officials to lead, not take or follow polls.
Further, unless a survey is scientifically conducted it is not accurate and only reflects the voices who are loudest. Whatever the issue may be it would be the same as taking a poll of people who attend anti-health care reform rallies to determine what the American people think about health care.
And I’m in the camp that contends that our elected officials should represent and serve their constituent. Of course, they should also use good judgment, careful research, good decision-making, leadership skills, and good communication as well. Not all of their constituents will agree on any particular issue and many issues are not black and white (including this one!). However, if a majority of residents support or oppose a particular decision and can articulate why, then my Board member better have darn good data and reasoning to support why they have the opposite position from the key CSD stakeholders. And I understand the dangers of mob rule but I don’t think that the use of Survey Monkey will instigate it. Survey Monkey or similar rapid polls are used all the time now in the work world to get a quick gauge of preferences among stakeholders. You need a much less precise instrument to gauge general opinion than you do for scientifc research. Wide confidence intervals are not only ok, but instructive. In the event that Decatur parents or teachers become an angry, lunatic mob, I give my Board member permission to ignore the Survey Monkey results. Seriously, listening to and gauging the preferences of stakeholders is only one step in the complex art of decision making, but skipping those steps is often pennywise and pound foolish.
I completely disagree with CSD Snowflake!
Tyler, so that must mean that any political election only reflects the voices of those who are loudest. With the exception of an occasional presidential election, most people in this country don’t vote.
I don’t think that we should govern by survey but in keeping with the idea that CSD is a charter system I’d like to see more governance move down the ladder a bit. The current SLTs have no more real authority than their precursors, school councils, did. You have to remember that CSD is a charter system. If CSD is going to get all the perks and waivers that come with being a charter system that they should also have to take seriously the accompanying responsibilities….. such as moving more decision making power down the ladder. CSD did a fairly good job in this regard with Reconfiguration Part Deux, but I’d like to see them continue to improve in this regard. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
MrFixit,
I too would like to see more empowerment from the bottom-up. I may be in the minority when I express the opinion that top-down and bottom-up management styles can be complimentary.
There needs to be a balance. We need to keep the good that has come with providing a systemic and consistent educational experience across all schools. But we also need to allow schools to have distinct personalities. I want schools to have the freedom to prove out and validate new ideas. -Which we can then share across schools.
I don’t want to see more local school governance because it is a state mandate, but because it makes sense. I want to see more local school governance where it will allow the people who know our schools best (the principals, teachers, kids, and involved parents) to help make our schools better.
Historically the Board has not reached out to the parents and community members for feedback. Dr. Edwards even said herself, at the first reconfig listening session, that previously they just made decisions and moved forward without soliciting feedback. This year they hit a brick wall when they tried to do that with reconfiguration and it was the first time they really started to “listen” to parents and community members. I think the push for more community feedback is a direct result of their tendency to ignore parents in the past. With hope, the new Board will open up that process quite a bit.
I am also of the world-view/philosophy of Scott…
“I’m a CSD parent, I’m involved in my child’s education, I do my best to pay attention to the issues and form opinions, and there is *no way* I would trust myself to be making decisions that affect everyone. That is, I recognize that even a fairly diligent parent such as myself is nowhere near informed enough in the big picture to be leading change, so why would I want other parents — equally struggling to stay abreast of everything while managing everyday life — taking the lead on how we educate our kids?”
I would only use convenience surveys to get some opinions from the community (I think the use of text comment fields would be best for the use of these kinds of surveys); I would not extrapolate them to “this is what my constituents want.” The analogy to the town hall meetings vs. recent gallup polls on health care is exactly correct….a convenience survey (aka town hall meeting) does not generalize to represent % of constituents for or against an issue.
I believe in experts; I believe in evidence based practice.
With decision-making done by SurveyMonkey, who needs board members?
I,too, follow Scott’s thinking here.
I am a long time Decatur resident . My historical perspective goes back to the time of Superintendent Griffith. Back then, BOE members were appointed not elected. The workings of CSD have come a long way . To me, our current process is quite open.
The current administration and BOE HAVE made themselves available to take community input on major issues. In the reconfiguration that created the 4/5 , there were numerous listening sessions and public comment forums. These people spent hours and hours listening to allow all citizens to have their say. Anyone can make an appointment to see Dr Edwards and discuss any issue. Email and mailing addresses for all BOE members are published on the CSD website. Just because the wishes of vocal parents are not always met, it doesn’t mean those parents were ignored.
I think this desire to hear all opinions has often impeded the ability to move forward. It seems some CSD parents want to be heavily involved in every decision . That is not an efficient way to run a school system.
I agree with Bruschetta that surveys may have a place to take the temperature of the community ( the whole community – not just CSD parents) on a few important issues. I worry that every time someone doesn’t agree with a CSD action, there will be a call for reconsideration based on public input. We will reach a point where no decision can be made without a survey.
As others have said, we elect BOE members to lead. They in turn hire administrators with the education and experience necessary to run the school system.
Mr Goebel, you seem like a person with the background and experience to make a fine BOE member. Whatever the election result, I am glad you are part of our community. I will certainly consider you for my vote although it will be in spite of rather than because of your interest in surveys.
I appreciate everyone’s well thought out comments and concerns. I hope to hear your thoughts on some of the other issues as well. And I hope you will consider all the issues when you register your opinion on that upcoming Nov. 3rd survey
It is best to start on common ground. -I think we all agree that public involvement in a process promotes but doesn’t necessitate acceptance of outcomes. And I hope we can agree that our recent decision to survey teachers but exclude parent and community surveys was a mistake. The question isn’t whether or not to use surveys. -Our system already uses surveys. We need to be aware of their limitations, and make sure they are used inclusively.
There is a subtle and significant difference between an open process where people can have their say, and a process where people feel they’ve been heard. By profession, I am a software engineer. I like to deal with realities. Something I struggle with, is the reality that in the public arena perception is reality. And the reality in Decatur is that there are a lot of open wounds in this community which revolve around the past decisions of the Board.
Fifi, I haven’t been around Decatur long enough to have the historical perspective which you do. From talking with people like yourself, I do understand that things have gotten better. I think we can go forward and make things better yet.
You are right. Just because the board didn’t co-opt the opinion of a very vocal set of parents, doesn’t mean those voices weren’t heard. If I’m hearing you correctly. Your point is that we’ve been down this path before. That there was a dialogue, the board listened, and some people haven’t been able to get past it and move forward.
I don’t wish to diminish the contributions of the incumbent. But I do believe that the community will have more success coming back together and moving forward with a change of leadership in the board.
It is likely that in the upcoming years we will face other difficult issues. As a member of the Board, I expect I will be more involved and better informed than the community at large. But I will not take that as an excuse to avoid making every reasonable effort to engage and involve the community in the process. -Particularly on issues as significant as reconfiguration.
It isn’t fair to pass judgment with 20/20 hindsight. I wasn’t in the hot seat. The current board has made some hard decisions. Some of them turned out to be short-sighted. On the whole, our school system has improved. I will promise you, that I will do my best to make decisions with a long term vision in the best interest of the whole community. -Even when those decisions are the unpopular ones. I will request surveys on issues of significance. But I will not allow those surveys to dictate policy.
In closing, I believe that surveys with all their warts, can provide a useful role in identifying hot-button issues. Scott, I do take your meaning. And you are right that we need to be wary. When we run into issues where a sizable number of people feel very strongly, we should not allow a vocal minority to set policy. It is however best at such times, when possible, to slow down and open up the process to wider community involvement. It is important that this involvement be a 2-way dialog. Which is why I also recommend round table and town hall meetings. I also believe it is important that the board fully explain and justify itself when making unpopular decisions.
I don’t wish to diminish the contributions of the incumbent. But I do believe that the community will have more success coming back together and moving forward with a change of leadership in the board.
Are we really still talking about the 2004 (2005?) reconfiguration that closed Westchester.? Yes, it was a tough decision, but it was the correct one then and the correct one now. Mr. Wisniewski faced a re-election challenge on the heels of that decision (when it was still fresh) and faced an opponent who ran a singular campaign based on that issue. Wisniewski won in a landslide.
Evidence-based practice is to get ground level involvement of the parents, teachers, and the whole school community as much as possible. That’s was the rationale behind going to a charter system, not just convenience for administrators who want to avoid state rules that don’t fit Decatur well. Several Board members were hesitant about the charter approach. There’s no question in my mind that they have excellent intentions and believe in strong leadership but those intentions and leadership may need some refreshing, either through new Board members or by the current members reaching out more to the whole community and opening up their minds to fresh ideas and fresh evidence. Our test scores and fiscal situation are better than many in Georgia but are still borderline in many areas. It’s no time for complacence or sitting on our laurels.
As I saw it, many citizens outside the CSD parent community had mixed feelings about the charter system application. The concern I heard voiced most frequently was about taking control out of the hands of the state, the elected BOE and their appointed administrators and putting it into the hands of parents. If you don’t have a child in the school system, you can’t vote for school leadership team positions. I am not sure whether this system gives equal voice to all citizens .
I believe involvement and control are two separate things. I welcome ground level involvement in our schools. I am not as sure about giving control to those not elected by City wide ( or at least district wide ) vote . I sent emails to our Board members expressing this opinion . I know others who did the same.
Perhaps those BOE members who were hesitant about converting to a charter system read those emails and were considering a wide range of public opinion.
Agree completely that involvement and control are not the same thing and that’s why I’m puzzled when the Board and CSD Admin act so nervous about things like surveys. Survey Monkey cannot undermine good, confident, non-defensive leadership. Sometimes the Board and CSD Admin circle the wagons when maybe dialogue or better communication would be the more appropriate response.
When I worked with the Central Office and other parents to review and influence the charter system petition, I worked to influence having a community member included as a voting member of the School Leadership Team. The goal was to have a balance of staff and parent involvement with a community member being able to tip the balance.
You are correct. The community member is appointed by the principal, teachers, and parent School Leadership Team (SLT) representatives. They are not elected by the community. I don’t think it was ever considered. Do you believe it is feasible? I would be interested to hear your thoughts on how it could be implemented fairly and efficiently. The charter can be amended. We are very much figuring it out as we go.
Community members can be involved. SLT meetings are open to the public. Like the Board, time is allotted for public comment. But the elected representatives are representatives of the school not the community. I can understand your concerns.
It is worth mentioning that the mandate that comes with being a charter school is for a local school governing body. SLTs do not have a governing role in system wide issues. SLTs do not set curriculum or determine how much funding a school will receive. I wonder whether or not enough community members would step forward? I believe that currently, when a community member willing to server can not be found, a parent is appointed to the position.
Here’s a suggestion…
What about private surveys that aren’t released to the public? Then there’s no fear of using them as a political bludgeon and the board still gets a gauge of the public’s mindset.
Agreed that removes the political bludgeon possibilities, DM, but it doesn’t prevent activist groups from gaming the results. Thus, BOE members still end up with a “temperature reading” that’s of little use in terms of both what the true will of the community is and what’s in the best interest of kids system-wide.
Garrett made reference to the importance of Lieutenants listening to their Sergeants and I agree with how important that is in tracking what’s going on in the field. But I liken that to the SLTs talking with their neighbors, then passing their *analysis* of what they’re hearing up the command chain. That’s why we value people who are closer to the problem. They’re not just taking raw, questionable data and reacting. They’re analyzing input from all kinds of sources, and providing the kind of filter that subsequently provides the board with usable information.
True. I just figured that since the results wouldn’t be made public that it would be easier for the board to discuss the figures in closed session and come to their own conclusions about any potential activist skewing and figure that into their decision…without worrying about political consequences.
I think we’re getting carried away with terminology like “activist groups” ! It’s not like we’ve got the “Decatur Nine” setting off bombs in Central Office. In fact, a more participatory approach, if done sincerely and strategically, can head off the formation of groups of frustrated parents . The sorts of issues that concern parents in Decatur are things like school renovation and closure, trailers, allocation of budget resources, choices of curriculum, block scheduling (whatever the heck that is), the school calendar, teacher/student ratios, etc., test scores, not open revolution! In fact, it was the CSD administration and certain school Board members who instigated the development of a system charter. Many of us wondered if the strong centralized style of CSD was really compatible with a charter approach. If CSD is sincerely committed to the system charter approach, it needs to show fidelity to the concept of local school governance through SLTs. If not, let’s just be direct and call it a day for the charter.
Given that Decatur is blessed with both incumbents and challengers who are basically decent, honest, earnest folks (unlike many School Boards around here), it’s going to be important that the voters understand the issues and candidate positions so they can intelligently choose between them. This may be a rare opportunity to vote based on rational choices vs. political marketing. I’m hearing that there’s going to be a lot of “meet and greets” and some candidate forums around. I urge folks to attend these and study the issues. It’s just like Civics class, but for real!
CSD is one of the smallest school systems in the state. I don’t really understand why centralized leadership is such a bad thing. I favored the charter status primarily to escape the reach of state regs written for the average GA system which is huge compared to CSD.
Our elementary schools feed into one school beginning at grade 4 and we stay with a single school through 12th. Our school populations are racially and economically diverse but the spread of diversity is similar at each school. This city is only 4 square miles. To me that makes even centralized authority pretty local.
I honestly don’t get why varying characters are needed among our 7 small schools or why they need such independent governance.
Someone enlighten me…….
….because that’s the deal. If you want a system charter, you need to show local school governance. Otherwise, you have to follow the same rules as the rest of the school districts. A charter is like a contract; each side has responsibilities.
It’s inappropriate to charge ~7-11 teachers, parents, community members, and adminstrators to spend several hours a month at regular and work group meetings, have parents vote for SLT members, refer parents with concerns to SLTs, and advertise yourself as a charter system if you are not going to live up to the spirit of SLTs. By the way, I don’t think CSD is completely ignoring SLTs but I think they have a ways to go before they live up to the spirit of the System Charter Law and their own charter.
Fifi, size-wise, Decatur is no where near the smallest system in Georgia. There are around180 systems in Georgia total. Over 70 or those are smaller than Decatur. That puts us in about the bottom 40% but nowhere near the smallest. It’s a common misconception that CSD is tiny.
There are dozens of school systems in Georgia that are even smaller than Decatur High!
We are just smaller than average but nothing special as a far as size goes..
Thanks Mr Fixit. I stand corrected on the size figures. I do believe that the state regulations and funding formulas favor the larger districts – even if they are not as large a majority as I thought.
I still question what is wrong with fairly centralized control for a relatively small number of schools.
Top-down and bottom-up are not mutually exclusive. They are complimentary.
Nothing is wrong with effective fairly centralized top-down management. However, part of what determines whether top-down management will be effective over the long-term, is whether or not the leaders at the top are able to keep in touch with the changes going on at the ground level.
We have a community, parents and teachers which are incredibly involved and committed. They are working hard in our schools and many of them are frustrated by their inability to influence things in a positive direction.
Good ideas also come from the bottom-up. Following the previous reconfiguration, there were discipline issues at Glennwood. This problem was addressed by the School Council, who failing to find support from the administration were able to raise funds to hire Rodney Thomas. Rodney is now the Dean of Students at Glennwood. And is generally credited for turning the discipline issue around.
As we move forward together as a Charter System, we will likely see more change in our school system. Empowering bottom-up local school governance will compliment and make our central administration more effective. It will enable us as a system to respond more quickly and correctly to the changes going on in our schools.
I would much rather talk about what we can do to move forward together. But the truth is that many people are still very upset about the recent past. I wasn’t here during the last reconfiguration. In that regard, I represent a clean slate and a fresh start.
By 2012 according to the central office’s enrollment projections, we may need 28 classrooms at the 4/5 Academy. Can you imagine having trailers at 5th Avenue the day it opens? By 2014 using the same projection methodology, Renfroe and DHS will become overcrowded. My own analysis using historical enrollments from the NCSE going back to 1986 closely tracks the central office projections, but projects somewhat lower enrollments at Renfroe and DHS. However the difference between historic enrollments and the current growth in enrollments is specifically the unprecedented growth of enrollments at the middle and high schools.
The current overcrowding problems need to be addressed in the context of a long term vision which prepares us not just for today’s overcrowding issue, but for the:
o potential problems we are projecting 5 years out
o possibility of annexation
o historic highs and lows in enrollment levels
We need to be working through these problems now. So that when we attempt to solve these problems with construction and/or re-opening schools, the solutions won’t be short-sighted. I believe we are currently at the beginning of 5-8 years of increasing enrollments. However, we need to deal not only with high enrollments, but also to consider future downturns. And how we can achieve systemic efficiencies under both scenarios.
(Note: The election you mention was decided by 220 votes with ~10% turnout. Decatur has roughly 14,700 registered voters. Landslide is a term usually defined by the person using it.)
GG: “(Note: The election you mention was decided by 220 votes with ~10% turnout. Decatur has roughly 14,700 registered voters. Landslide is a term usually defined by the person using it.)”
That’s an interesting point, Garrett, but couldn’t it just as easily be read the opposite way? That is, genuine “hot button” issues that galvanize communities tend to bring out voters in hordes. With such a tiny turnout, perhaps the community opposition to the reconfiguration wasn’t as strong as its most vocal members would have us believe.
Note I’m not speaking for or against the reconfiguration. Just reiterating my general discomfort with valuing raw data at the exclusion of common sense observation (and no, I’m not suggesting that’s what you’re doing; just that it tends to come up in these conversations).
Scott, my response was actually meant to have been a follow-on to Tyler’s claim of a previous landslide victory. Numbers can of course be spun either way. My intention was simply to provide some of the raw data by which the readers could draw their own conclusions on Tyler’s claims.
An oversight on my part was in calculating voter turn out against all of Decatur’s registered voters. I don’t know if it is a safe assumption, but we may be able to assume that District 1 has 1/2 of Decatur’s registered voters. In which case, the District 1 turn out was probably closer to 21%. By comparison, there was a 26% drop in votes between that election and the last municipal election in District 1. Of course in it, the incumbent ran unopposed. -I am not a politician. This is my first political campaign. I do not know what typical municipal voter turnout is.
While I think it is safe to read the results as an affirmation of the majority of Decatur residents of the incumbent, I also believe the previous election illustrates a deep divide. I run into people every day who are still very upset. We need to find a way to put the past behind us, and focus on moving forward together.
You know, I doubt that there are many who think that the current school board is doing a bad job. I think they have done a great job and would continue to do well. However, with the exception of Bernadette, this board does carry a lot of baggage (undeservedly so) because of the last reconfiguration. I don’t think that it’s possible for this board to earn the complete trust of a large segment of parents because neither side seems to be able to get beyond the reconfiguration. Both sides still, after several years, have a bad taste in their mouths. There are school board members who are dismissive of certain parents and parents who are dismissive of our school board and administration – all because of the Westchester stuff. This is not an ideal situation.
It seems to me that it would be beneficial for all involved to begin the move to a new group of leaders who do not carry the weight of the reconfiguration. Everyone would get to start over with a clean slate.
I think our board members are wonderful, but they are not the only wonderful people in Decatur. I think it’s possible to get some fresh faces with fresh ideas on the school board who can really help CSD move to its next era. I think that you can appreciate the great things that our current school board has accomplished while at the same time understanding that there is occasionally the need for a “regime change.” That is why so many of our political leaders have term limits.
I would like to second the contention that strong top-down leadership can co-exist with strong involvement from the front line–parents, teachers, and students. As with everything else in life, a moderate approach blending the best of both extremes is probably the best one. Problem is that it takes a lot of self-confidence, non-defensiveness, and time on the part of strong central leadership to properly collaborate and cooperate with local school governance. This is what I see is the transition that is being attempted in Decatur and may or may not succeed depending on how much committment CSD gives it. It always seems easier to make the “best” decision centrally. But central-based decisions can fail for at least two reasons:
1. Lack of attention to details that are not easy to observe or understand from the central level.
2. Lack of commitment by the folks who actually end up implementing the decision–teachers, students, school principals and staff, and parents. You can try to impose compliance by force but that’s usually only a short-term success, if that. The arts of teaching and leading require more than following directives from above or delivering curriculum units–they require passion, interpretation, energy, creativity, and caring, all of which cannot be dictated from the top down. An example is that the principals were not involved in a substantive way with the decision to become a system charter or the writing of the charter. Therefore, it’s taken some time for them to get on board with the concept, understand it fully, and practice it, never mind embrace and model it. I think their behavior would have been very different if they had been involved more fully with the entire process as stakeholders, not just lieutenants taking orders from the generals above.