February 7, 2007

Parent Post

Please correct in your school board response - it's candidate John Robertson, not Jim Robertson, as you have in your first paragraph. I would like to respond to the person who is upset about Wade Christiansen being the moderator for the School Board Forum last week. This person clearly doesn't realize that it was Clay Christensen, not Wade Christensen, who is the Secretary of the Foundation. This poster went on to describe the ages of Wade's children and their close proximity to the HS. Get your facts straight, people. This kind of misinformation amongst the people in this district just perpetuates the confusion for others who "do not know" about the participation of families in the DC Schools events and organizations. It also negates your point since you don't know who you are writing about. Be careful, don't muddy the waters or no one will get your point. And to Clay's defense, he was asked to moderate this Forum. If you'd like to have a Forum, have one! Maybe volunteer to moderate it!

Our Reply

Thanks. I worked with Jim Robertson for years and have trouble keeping it straight.

Parent Post: Have you noticed that Marc Anderson is only listed as a donor on the DCSF website. He's not on the trustee list!

Our Reply: They probably have not updated their website.
The handout they gave at the forum did have him listed as
a trustee.

Parent Post 1: It is absolutely not OK to have school employees and family members involved in the school board election forum. I was already hesitant to submit a question because of concerns over confidentiality. With what I now know, I am glad I didn't submit a question.

Our Reply: You know we have been so wrapped up in the ethics of the situation that we never even thought of the confidentiality. Good Point.

Parent Post 2: What is new here? Those of us who have been around long enough to know where the DCCEF started and where it has wound up........are so disappointed! For years, we have donated, volunteered, attended banquets, golf tournaments etc. to help to grow what was meant to be a district-wide organization.

This year we began with a lie that has continued to manifest itself throughout the first half of the year. We began with Dr. Drooby's "give me your money speech", followed by school board (and unbiased - right?!) member Danny Barnes telling us it was our obligation to support the foundation and that we had moved here for the schools (guess he hasn't met those that farm, wanted land close to the city or any of our neighbors that retired here).

Upon donating out of sheer guilt, we were told that a decision had been made to give 65% of our donations to the high school. Hmmm... I have in writing from my donation paperwork that "all monies donated will be divided equally amongst students per enrollment at each site". Not to worry.......they have a lawyer as a secretary - Wade Christiansen. Yes, the same man who is supposedly leading this forum. What does the Foundation have to do with the school board election? Isn't the foundation adamant that they are a separate entity? Then why put the board in their back pocket by supporting and funding their only forum? Can you say politics?

After much thought, we chose to never donate again. Finally, we have spoken with the masses - you know - those of us not worthy of membership in the foundation - our money doesn't buy our way in...... We teach our children not to bully in our district; however, we support a "clique" that funds our needs, a school board that is made up of social friends, and employees that provide family members with jobs or job security. Interesting - but hey; I was told we moved here for the schools.

Finally, visiting with others, I realized that the money went to the high school because all but one member has a child there. What happened to the majority of the district that makes up 3 elementary schools and 1 MS? Granted we will all have children there someday; but shouldn't that have been a separate fundraiser? Dollars spent should have been raised just for that - not taken out of our children’s education because less than a dozen people who had just months earlier promised to share it with all and match those funds from outside sources (grants and foundation eligible programs).

I guess what is most important is that President Jeff Reames provide technology for his 2 high school daughters, Vice President Bill Haalands daughter, Secretary Wade Christiansen (yeah - the same guy supposedly running the forum that yes - our foundation who states they are separate from the schools - yet host the board election forum so they can "snuggle up" to the members) raise funds for his daughter and next year high school son, Lyndon Taylor provide for his high school daughter and son and next year second daughter, Denise Castelli raise money for her high school daughter, Eno Chang support her 2 high school sons, Janet Harlan provide for her high school son, Monica Wittrocks high school senior and I guess poor Mike Williams will have to wait a year. No one wanted to be the treasurer so they allowed a measly elementary aged parent, Bill Brenner be along for the ride - he has to do all the work of the finances for free so that was awfully kind!

Where has the foundation been this year? We have a brand new school that barely met standards to open the door and we spend 65% of our money on high school technology. Yes, we need it. But, the raise we just gave our superintendent would have bought a smart board or two.... The foundation has ruined the reputation that so few started. There was years of dedication and hard work by parents who cared about the masses. Now it is a political gain.

If you are on the Foundation you can donate money to your child’s classroom, pick your teacher for two years plus the curriculum - ask school board member Danny Barnes. When I have given money it had to be a minimum of $1000 to be earmarked and I could only state for what project - not pick everything along the way. Trust comes in to play there. That is what we have lost with the current Foundation. The new families in our school don't even know we have a foundation. Hopefully whomever is elected will separate the two organizations.

The board has a professional courtesy to uphold. Vacationing with staff is not included. If you don't want to be limited; don't run for office. There is a lot that goes in to public service. Ask President Clinton about his choice in cigars! For those that moved here for the education; maybe they will leave because of the financial politics, the lack of athletic support, the unequal support amongst the schools, the lack of support for our staff, the superintendent that was moved from school and positions because she was incapable of getting along with staff and performing her job duties. Yes, some of us have been around longer than those that "moved here for the education".

Our Reply

The DCSF is holding the forum because they were asked to. The forum used to be put on by the PTO but was changed and you would have to ask those involved as to why. The truth of the matter is anybody can hold a forum. Anybody can host the candidates if they so choose. The Prairie Vale PTO had all four of the candidates at their last meeting. Who actually holds a forum is a non-issue.

I would actually go as far to say most people couldn’t tell you who held the last forum and what candidates were involved. I would venture a guess that maybe a total of 50 people showed up and if you subtract candidates families and friends the number would be even less. I will be curious to see how many people show up for this forum. I hope that this whole mess will not keep people from attending because even if you don’t like the questions asked you can still talk to all four candidates personally.

As for the other issue you brought up about the Contribution size to the High School we again will respectfully agree to disagree with you. We certainly can see your point with the information you provide but again I think sometimes we paint ourselves into a corner which keeps us from doing the right thing. I believe that is what the DCSF did by saying that all donations will be split evenly amongst all schools by student ratio.

While we agree that it is a shame that Rose Union opened this year barely meeting standards for education but is that the DCSF fault? No the blame there needs to go to the school district and the school administration. Kudos to the teachers, Principal Riggs and her entire staff for performing under the conditions they were put into. The DCSF needs to keep focused on the bigger picture and not get involved with fighting fires for the school district.

I will finish by stating my appreciation of the DCSF for all that they have done for the school district and every school over the years. It is unfortunate that a couple of individuals in the DCSF have tarnished it's reputation as a whole.

If this truly was democratic, somebody at the foundation would take responsibility for what has happened and maybe even step down from their position. But then again the first step to fixing a problem is admitting that you have a problem. From what we have seen so far the chances of that are slim to none.

Parent Post

What better way is there to eliminate any topics that question that principal’s ability to do her job?

Our Reply

There was an article yesterday in the Edmond Section of the Oklahoman about the upcoming Forum being held by the DCSF. It quoted Jeff Reames and it also quoted Foundation Member Marc Anderson. Mr. Anderson's quote was related to the questions being asked at the forum. Well there is no question now that Mr. Anderson was involved and yes it makes you wonder if questions about his wife, Prairie Vale Principal Michelle Anderson, will be politely overlooked.

We have been very supportive of the DCSF in the past and again state our support for the DCSF. We unfortunately can no longer support the individuals who are running the DCSF. By allowing the husband of a principal, a principal who many patrons think should be relieved of her duties, to participate in deciding what questions are going to be asked at a forum for future board members is just plain ignorant. There is just no plausible explanation for doing this. To top it all off, the individual is not a Trustee, he is a doner.

Every time we post anything about the DCSF, whether it is good or bad, we get e-mails from the same individuals telling us how evil, destructive, and non-religious we are. They also ask“What are you teaching your children by doing this?”. This time there have been no emails from them. I wonder why. Could it be that this time these same people are going to the DCSF, asking them “What are they teaching the children by doing what they are doing?”

Could these individuals be wondering if the DCSF, through their actions,be teaching our children?

• it is okay not to obey the rules of ethics.
• If you have enough money or power it is okay to rewrite the rules anyway you want.
• It is more important to get what is best for you or your family then it is to do what is best for everybody else.
• Telling the truth is not as important as being in control.
• Last but not least, if anyone ever accuses you of anything, just accuse the attacker of not caring about the children because it is always about the children.
  

Parent Post:

This is sooooooo wrong but so are a lot of things in the district. Isn't there any accountability for administration?

Our Reply

It has become very obvious over time that there is no accountability anywhere. The goal is not to solve problems but to quickly cover them up. The ultimate form of accountability is from the patrons. The school also has that under control since most people are afraid to say anything because they fear their kids will feel the repercussions. So no internal accountability, no external accountability, no problems.

Deer Creek is criticized in the outside world for being a school district that is controlled by a few families. I used to think that was erroneous. Unfortunately, as time goes by, it seems to be true. Hiring relatives, including DC staff in third party forums, protecting friends who are employees all point to this.

Criticism of the recent DCSF bylaw changes now makes sense. Maybe the reformation of the DCSF wasn’t only for more efficiency, as we were lead to believe, but also to keep the organization’s control to a few select individuals.

Parent Post

When it was announced that the Deer Creek Foundation would be hosting the forum for school board candidates, I held out some hope that this would actually be handled in a professional manner. If so, it was possible the forum might actually provide some much needed information to the people in the district.

I (and several others) were bothered to see that questions would not be taken at the forum, only those approved by the moderator would be asked. OK, perhaps that's a way to keep order and not just a way to filter out unwanted questions. Perhaps it was an effort to keep things professional and not just a way once again for the board and foundation to suppress issues that desperately need to be addressed.

All hope of this was lost when the Principal of Prairie Vale announced at the PTO meeting that "some of the questions are REALLY HAAARRRD.!”

The surprise in this announcement was not that she would think the submitted questions were hard. The surprise was that she would have any access to the questions. Why?

Our Reply

You know just when you thought it was safe to participate again...Is it me or is the irony here unbelievable. An organization that shares no information with the public can’t keep information private when it needs to be.

A reliable but unsubstantiated source mentioned that Principal Anderson’s husband was on the committee to select the questions. Can it get any worse? I guess it could they could have the superintendent’s husband as well.

There is just so much wrong with this it is staggering. Putting on a forum is not that difficult. We just held the County Commissioner Forum last summer and it went off without a hitch. The DCSF said that Clay Christensen was going to select the questions for the candidates from a pool of questions submitted by the patrons of Deer Creek. There is no mention of a committee. There is no reason for anybody from the school district to know anything about the questions.

Now is there any reason to believe that the questions being asked at the forum are truly what the patrons want to hear or what a select few want to hear?

Do you think having school employees and their family involved in a 3rd party candidate forum is okay?