What the audience was saying after yesterday’s School Board study session to delicately determine what to do about adjuncts at campuses other than El Marino Language School:
David Mielke, President of the Teachers Union – “It looks as though they can’t (approve El Marino’s adjunct program), except they are citing one little exception (in the Education Code) that says ‘even though you can’t do it, since one site has been doing it forever, we think you can do it.’ I am sure there is another interpretation to the littler segment they are citing.
“The bigger issue for me is – a number of School Board members raised this – the equity issue still is going to exist. If the program at one site (El Marino) can be maintained, but something similar at other sites would not be possible, there is a whole fairness-equity issue the Board has to deal with. I don’t know if equity can be achieved. But it seems the District lawyer was citing an exception that only would apply to El Marino.”
Debbie Hamme, President of the Assn. of Classified Employees – “If the equity issue is that every school can have its own booster club (to fund adjuncts), that is not the equity issue I see. Equity, for me, is whether all of the students throughout this District have equal access to services. That is what is important to us because unfortunately there still will be schools that raise funds a lot more effectively than other schools due to demographics. That means even if they are implementing the same format, they are not going to be able to earn the same amount of money. If you take all of the funds raised at individual schools, you still are not going to be able to provide the same level of services at a lower-earning school as at a higher-earning school.”
Mr. Mielke – “Should funds stay at the school or be spread around to all schools?” As for the meeting: “I am just looking for clarification, and I don’t think we are there yet. It’s good we had this meeting. But it is two months too late. But it’s good to clear the air and get issues on the table.”
Ms. Hamme – On the meeting: “This is only the first step. We have to be much farther into the process before we can be encouraged or discouraged.”
Scott McVarish, parent – “I read the memo from the attorney for the District, and it seems that it doers a little bit of a dance. In no way does it inhibit this School Board from passing the Feb. 28 motion by (Board member Laura Chardiet and supported by colleague Kathy Paspalis). Rather, the memo just raises issues, some legitimate, others that are red herrings. I think the Board has a good policy (by Ms. Chardiet) on the table. Perhaps with a couple tweaks, it is a policy the Board can approve. The Board needs to continue to focus on it. It is overwhelmingly supported by parents, as evidenced by a standing ovation from 200 parents the night she presented it. The Board doesn’t have that much work to do. They just need to have the guts to do it. A few Board members are afraid to do anything. That troubles me as a parent. They should have resolved this issue two months ago.”
(To be continued)
