In the world of protest, gone are the good ol’ days of merely disputing teacher layoffs, replaced by more sophisticated objections, the kind raised at last night’s School Board meeting.
Sandwiched around the announcement of a settlement in contract negotiations by the Teachers Union and harsh words by the School Board President for the Union President was an item normally a yawn-stifler.
Not, however, in the current emotional environment of massive job threats.
Renewing the contracts of the two surviving Assistant Superintendents usually would not be reported in the newspaper, unless the personalities were controversial. They are not.
Their names, Gwenis Laura and Ali Delawalla, hardly ever make print. Both are soft-spoken. Compared to many of their colleagues, they pass through the School District each day as unobtrusively as shadows but as effectively as stars of the first-rank.
Like a lightning streak, word spread that the Teachers Union and its supporters at the meeting would be seeking a demotion of the two administrators as a cost-saving, share-the-pain device.
Kudos by the Ton
For a few minutes, Ms. Laura, the Assistant for Educational Services, poker-faced as is her way, sat and listened to the kind of rhetorical bouquets that traditionally are inscribed on tombstones. Executives from the Music Center and other admirers described her manner and personality in ways designed to make a modest person blush.
No one spoke on behalf of Mr. Delawalla because another sacred tradition in school communities is for no one to know what the title of “Assistant Superintendent of Business Services” means or what he does.
When it was the turn of defenders of teachers and egalitarianism, they argued strenuously against the $250 a month mileage allowance for administrators as unfair partisanship, and stumped strongly for demotion as a money-saving gesture.
They pegged their demotion contentions to precedent, noting that that position of Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources had been downgraded several months ago to “Director of.” The corresponding reduction in salary amounted to $20,000. They believed the same logic should apply in the cases of Mr. Delawalla and Ms. Laura.
The Difference
However, a crucial distinction was drawn: It was pointed out that only after officeholder Patricia Jaffee announced her decision to retire was the position downgraded, effective only after Ms. Jaffee departed. The office was reduced, but the officeholder was not affected.
In the present case, both Ms. Laura and Mr. Delawalla would have been directly affected, sustaining about $20,000 slices from their $130,000 salaries.
As opponents of new contracts were gaining momentum, and in quest of valuable ammunition, one asked how many teachers have been laid off this year.
The answer may have been deflating, possibly belonging to the category of “Don’t ask a sensitive question in a precarious situation without knowing the answer.”
Supt. Dr. Myrna Rivera Coté said that while nine teachers potentially could meet that fate, no decision has been made on any of them.
Spurred by a passionate and detailed explanation of the Board’s position by member Scott Zeidman (see “A Peek Deep Inside the School Board’s Decision”) , the Board unanimously approved a two-year agreement for Mr. Delawalla and one year for Ms. Laura, and also easily voted to retain the mileage allowance. Karlo Silbiger was the lone resistor after teacher Casey Chabola reminded him that in his candidate days, he spoke against the allowance. Mr. Silbiger said that nudge and a flood of opposing emails convince him to stand for “no.”
Having the Next Word or Last Word
Earlier this month, David Mielke, President of the Teachers Union, announced that the union had filed charges of unfair conduct against the District. Specifically, he alleged that Board President Steve Gourley interfered with contract bargaining.
Mr. Gourley, a lawyer by day, said he didn’t believe he had done anything inappropriate. A master satirist, Mr. Gourley spoke up, dartingly, last night just before calling for a vote on the two Assistant Superintendents.
In the midst of a comment on progressive tiered cuts, he interjected:
“As I am already being assaulted by Mr. Mielke and his lies. I won’t go further into that,” and he returned to the subject at hand.
Mr. Mielke did not appear to be on the grounds when the observation was rendered.
