March 28, 2007

Startling issues surfaced with a closer look into the matter of the board deciding not to meet with the Prairie Vale patrons. 

1. Who on the board voted not to meet with the patrons?
2. Did the board violate the Open Meetings Act by their actions in the matter.
3. What board members participated in the voting?
4. Will the Superintendent put the topic of the meeting on the agenda at the next board meeting? 

Question 1 Who voted not to meet with the patrons?

A safe assumption would be that Shelley Denton, Dr. Danny Barnes, and Jan Larson voted against meeting with the patrons.  These were the same three individuals who voted against allowing the use of school property for the county commissioner forum.  We know this since it was confirmed that the other two board members at that time were in favor of it.  See Superintendent Wilkinson's rejection e-mail.

I found it ironic that while they voted "No", they still requested that we turn in a Facility Use Request so they can vote on it at the next board meeting.  We did not however turn in the request. I now regret not turning in the facility use request because I would have like have seen what their public answer would have been. 

They denied the request because they were concerned that the forum would be perceived as support for political candidates. How would allowing an outside organization use of a building would have been perceived as a possible scenario of advantage for any candidate especially when the school was not asked to participate? 

To add insult to injury, a few days later during the board meeting and only days before the election, after voting "No", why did Jan Larsen think her diatribe extolling the then current county commissioner's virtues would not have been perceived as a endorsement by the board. 

For the record, Jan Larsen said that she made the remarks because she always expresses appreciation for the work people do for the school.  Having been to the last 12 month’s worth of board meetings, it was the only time that Jan Larsen has expressed appreciation to any elected official.  But in her mind I am sure she did the right thing.

Question 2 Did the board violate the Open Meetings Act?

They will tell you "No" because in their minds they didn’t vote.  After speaking with members a decision was made. According to th Oklahoma School Law on Board Informal Gatherings or Communications & Authorized Teleconferences), we have to wonder.

Section 527. Informal Gatherings or Communications. No informal gatherings or any electronic or telephonic communications, except teleconferences as authorized by Section 3 of this act, among a majority of the members of a public body shall be used to decide any action or to take any vote on any matter. (25-306)

Is that considered a vote? It seem they did based on their meeting rejection letter:

"In conversations between the Superintendent and individual board members, it is clear that at this time our district administrative team does not believe this request to be the most appropriate or productive means of communication with our community."

Or did the Superintendent make the decision on her own?  If so, then the board will have no problem having the topic on the agenda at the next board meeting.

Question 3 What board members participated in the voting /discussion about the meeting?

When I was thinking about running for the school board I was told, if elected, that I may not be allowed to vote on certain because of the website and my pre-involvement with certain issues.  With that said did Dr. Barnes abstained from being involved with the Prairie Vale meeting due to his involvement in the Prairie Vale Lap Top issue?  Couldn’t that be seen as a conflict of interest?

Question 4 Will the Superintendent put the meeting as a topic at the next board meeting?

The Superintendent is now trying to set up meetings with a small group of Prairie Vale parents since she does not want to be seen as non-proactive.   I guess better late than never.  But the Superintendent only wants to meet with a few "select" individuals.  Here we go again.  Don’t they get it?  I feel like I am in the middle of a never ending shell-game. 

We are going to request that the Superintendent put Prairie Vale Meeting with Parents on the agenda of the next board meeting.  Let’s see how proactive the Superintendent is if she puts the topic on the agenda.  Then we will be able to see an official vote by the board and who votes what way.  We will keep you posted

March 21, 2007

Because of the numerous Prairie Vale posts, we felt it was time for the patrons to go to the Superintendent and School Board.  We started by asking individuals who had concerns or questions if they would be willing to come.  Initial affirmative responses quickly swelled from approximately 35 people to well over 50 at the last count.  The interest was obviously great enough so we sent a letter to the Superintendent requesting the meeting and asking that a board member be present. (Letter request meeting)

None of the topics that the patrons wanted to talk about went after the principal of the school directly.  Yes the patrons wanted to talk about leadership at the school but that not only involved the principal but also the school board and Superintendent.

To stray a little, the Prairie Vale principal has been making statements recently about her sex life.  Nobody cares about her personal life or suggests that she is having an affair as she has been telling people.  The questions that come into play revolve around the effects her actions at last years bachelorette party have on the teachers?  But let us get back on topic.

In the past we set up meetings with the Superintendent. One such meeting addressed Prairie Vale safety issues.  Patrons met with the Superintendent.  School Board President Greg Cwayna was scheduled to attend but, at last minute, business conflicts prevented him from participating.  I attended only as a moderator to keep the meeting focused on the agenda. It was a success, bringing issues to the Superintendent’s attention that she was previously unaware of and resulting in sweeping security changes at Prairie Vale.  I think everyone involved in that one meeting would feel that is was a great use of everyone's time.

This time the School Board President Shelley Denton and Superintendent Wilkinson declined to meet with the patrons (Rejection Letter – PDF) suggesting the meeting would not be productive and a good use of time.  Instead they recommended that every individual schedule a one-on-one meeting with the Superintendent.  Their response is mind boggling.  How is 1, two hour meeting with 50 people versus 50, one hour meetings a better use of Superintendent Wilkinson's time?  What is the board afraid of by refusing to meet with the patrons? How could Superintendent Wilkinson possibly see this as expiedient?

We have requested a meeting with the Superintendent and the School Board President to ask for clarification on their decision.  In the meantime we will continue to post articles showing the hypocrisy and lunacy that now engulfs the current leadership at the top.