Mrs. Murray Langley is Brewing Tea...

For heaven's sake-- what a tempest in a teapot.  This is a response to the ridiculous allegations raised by Cynthia Murray Langley and "reported" in Instant News Katy--  I won't comment there because I don't want to actually acknowledge them as a "news" source.  Perhaps one of my readers will post this to INK so others can get the full story.

Anyway, if Mrs. Murray Langley had taken three minutes to ASK the election officials what the delay was, as I did, she would have had the whole story, too, and put her mind at ease:

To set the stage for those not present:  the election officials were counting the ballots in the back of the ESC.  Observers in the room included Eric Duhon as the properly appointed Poll Watcher named by Michalsky and/or Griffin.  Mrs. Blackman's and Mrs. Majors' husbands were there representing them.  This is customary and there is nothing sinister about it.  They were present early in the process (by 7:15 p.m., I'm told) so they could see the ballot boxes and electronic machines come in after the polls closed, and were present during the count.  A rather large gathering of interested persons were assembled in the lobby and in the board room awaiting the results.  (Typically, results are announced between 9 and 10 o'clock.)  I saw Mr. Adams and Mr. Shaw come in the FRONT of the building along with all the other interested parties (including myself) and never left that area of the building; I imagine they were reluctant to go past the big sign "ELECTION OFFICIALS ONLY BEYOND THIS POINT" placed just past the bathrooms near the board room.

Results were not announced until around 12 o'clock.  The reason it took so long to announce them explains the "missing" votes:  The machines are new to the district, because the State's redistricting nightmare pushed the primaries to May 29, so we couldn't have the machines we usually use.  No matter; the various election judges went to trainings and were ready to go.  Apparently something had to be done to the machines after early voting but 2 of the polling places followed the directions in the booklet provided by the voting machine manufacturer which unfortunately omitted that step.  The remaining polling places followed the directions provided in the training and did that step.

As a check to the whole process, Kathy Adams, the assistant to the Election Official, Bill Haskett, kept a chart showing the exact number of early and election day voters.  When her list did not match the list that came out of the electronic machines plus the paper ballots, she would not sign off on the results, and caused a ruckus with the electronic machine company's representative over the two lists not "balancing".  Eventually, they narrowed the issue to the few machines that were treated differently, fixed the problem and re-ran the tape from the electronic voting machines.  VOILA, they balanced perfectly with the hand-written chart that Mrs. Adams kept, so there was confidence that the number of ballots cast were there on hand to be counted, and therefor the results were correct.

Yes, it was a long night, and I'm sure tempers were taut.  But I have to give Kathy Adams and Bill Haskett a big atta-boy for maintaining order and ensuring an accurate count.  Mr. Haskett did NOT allow additional poll watchers, including Mrs. Murray Langley, to bust in while they were attempting to reconcile why the two lists had different numbers of voters.  This was exactly the correct thing to do-- the LEAST productive thing would be to allow additional people in the room.  If you ever worked as a cashier or bank teller who had to balance the books at the end of your shift, you know what I'm talking about:  what you need to figure out the discrepancy is quiet reflection and no additional fussing with your cash drawer.  Since poll watchers from both "sides" were already present who could attest to what transpired, adding additional people halfway through the process is actually COUNTER productive.  I find it telling that it was someone standing OUTSIDE the room that is belly aching the loudest; Mr. Blackman and Mr. Majors are NOT saying anything was amiss.  Since they were present in the room as every ballot was counted, I want to hear what THEY have to say, not Mrs. Murray Langley!

While I'm talking about Mr. Haskett and Mrs. Adams, I want to note they have conducted Katy ISD elections for many years, and I dare you to find more earnest or honest people.  This lady and gentleman take great pains to be fair and above-board with everything they do.  To have Bill Proctor verbally assault them is reprehensible, and to have the process of tabulating these votes called into question by Mrs. Murray Langley is ridiculous.  Bill Proctor should be ashamed of his appalling behavior towards these people.  I certainly am.  While I understand his extreme disappointment in the outcome of this election because it derailed his power grab, he needs to learn to control his temper.

In summary, Mrs. Murray Langley's complaint to the Secretary of State is a terrific waste of her time, his time, and your time.  More theatrics for political gain.  I encourage you to dismiss this behavior as such.

Election Results Are In!

The election is over!


For Position 6: Bryan Michalsky won with 55.8% of the vote.  (2931 votes to 2322 for Majors)
For Position 7: Charles Griffin won with 48.6% of the vote.  (2569 votes to 1846 for Blackman, 635 for Howard, and 233 for Powell).  


My take-away: 

1. 5283 voters cast ballots.  YEAH!  While this is still well under 5% of the registered voters in the district, it is more votes than those cast in recent years by a good bit, particularly since this was a 2-seat race with no real hot-button issue: 
• 2008: 4893 voters.  3-seat races typically bring out more voters.
• 2009: 2063 voters.  2-seat race.
• 2010: 1744 voters.  2-seat race, but Fox was unopposed.
• 2011: 4544 voters.  3-seats plus a hot-button issue: teacher layoffs.
2. It would appear that a lot of new voters came to the polls.  That is a good thing-- people in Katy are beginning to pay attention to and understand what is happening in the community and do what is necessary to protect it.  We are no longer in an environment where it works to express your overall satisfaction with the district by NOT voting.  
3. Many new people worked on the various races, and that is a VERY good thing.  More engagement by a broader base of people means more viewpoints factored into our trustees' decisions.  
4. Enough people voted for Griffin to avoid allowing Blackman to win with 35% of the vote.  That's exactly how Huckaby won last year.  While I respect Neal Howard and his service to the board, incumbents faced huge challenges this year.  Just check out Ft. Bend ISD's election results.  I appreciate Betty Powell's willingness to run for the board and hope she will continue to be engaged in the process.  I hope she will do Leadership Katy next year and be a resource to new board members regarding technology.   

Is it over yet?  Already rumors of voter fraud and tampering are being spread by the Nay-Sayers.  Lawsuits are being threatened. Fortunately, Mrs. Blackman's and Mrs. Majors' husbands served as poll watchers and witnessed the counts.  Although there was a technical problem with the electronic voting machines, the election judges waited until all issues were resolved before announcing results around midnight.  Perhaps a good night's sleep will help people see there was no wrong-doing, just as there was none last year.  

Now, the real work starts:  The new board will have to form a new team (because the board as a WHOLE, not individuals, oversees the district's management).  That will be difficult, given that Proctor and Huckaby hand-picked and openly campaigned for Majors and Blackman, including Instant News Katy  comments, robo-calls and mass e-mails.  I hope the remaining five members can move Proctor and Huckaby to work for the good of the district rather than for power plays.  I also hope the new board can make a commitment to stop infighting and get out of the way of the district's regular business.  Too much has been put "on hold" for the past year. 

"A bend in the road is not the end of the road...unless you fail to make the turn."

--Unknown

Why I Will Vote for Michalsky and Griffin

I've had people say to me, "OK, Chris, I get who you are AGAINST, but who will you vote for?"  This is an updated post from several days ago:

Bryan Michalsky is my choice for Position 6.  He is chief financial officer for a local company, and has five children ranging in grades pre-K through 12.  He has children at both Seven Lakes and Katy High Schools.  The board needs someone with a strong financial background, and Mr. Michalsky's business experience will serve the board well on many of the decisions coming up.  

In Position 7, I will vote for Charles Griffin.   Mr. Griffin is a retired Lt. Colonel and airline pilot with strong Katy roots, having graduated from Katy High School and the Air Force Academy.  He has four children, and his wife was a cafeteria monitor who was let go when those positions were eliminated last year.  His uncle is Michael Griffin, after whom Griffin Elementary is named.  He brings a depth of knowledge about our heritage, and is anxious to work hard to improve the reputation of the district, and he is keenly interested in improving the communications from the district. 

Like most Katy voters, Mr. Griffin and Mr. Michalsky were not paying attention to school board elections before last year.  They are working hard to catch up fast.  They have met and are meeting with administrators, teachers, community leaders, former school board members such as myself, and the current board members, including Proctor and Huckaby, in order to ask opinions on issues the district is facing.  They will bring a diversity to the board that is envisioned in the State Law that requires seven board members elected from the community to oversee the professional educators who will actually run the district.  We don't need five superintendents; we need one superintendent properly tasked and evaluated by seven school board members who bring to the board expertise in a wide variety of areas such as business and financial acumen, community relations, technology, human resources, law, government relations, etc.

I have tremendous respect for Neal Howard and would be happy if  he won, too. However, given the anti-incumbent fervor I still see in our community, I believe it will be impossible for an incumbent to be re-elected this year.  I also respect Betty Powell for being part of the electoral process.  However, remember: in our school board elections, THERE ARE NO RUN-OFFS.  Whichever candidate gets the most votes will win, even if it's only 26% of the vote in a four-person race.  I am very concerned Cynthia Blackman will win if the vote splits, just like Huckaby won last year with only 35% of the vote.  Please vote, talk about the election, and encourage your friends and neighbors to vote. 

Early voting is Monday and Tuesday this week only;  7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m at:

KISD Education Support Complex,

Wolfe Elementary,

Cinco Ranch High School, and

Taylor High School. 

You can vote at any of those locations during Early Voting.  On Election Day (Saturday, May 12), you will need to vote at your polling place.

More information on voting is here.

"Covert Proceedings" is a Bunch of Hooey

Katy school board has two types of meetings each month, a "Work Study" and a "Regular" meeting.  Basically the same issues are discussed at both meetings.  The "work study" is usually 1-2 weeks ahead of the "regular" meeting and is a meeting for the board to ask questions and discuss the issues so that the administration can figure out where a consensus is likely to be.  Once that is discovered, the superintendent and administration can make a recommendation at the regular meeting where the issue will be voted on, hopefully 7-0 or close to that, so that the direction from the board is clear. Frequent 5-2 or 4-3 votes indicate a dysfunctional board. For more on that, see here.  


Now, within each type of meeting, there are two "sub-meetings": a "Closed Session" and an "Open Session."  The Closed (sometimes called "executive") Session is exactly as it sounds: closed to the public.  Everything that the school board discusses must be done in open session, unless the topic is one of the exceptions listed in the Open Meetings Act.  For school districts, the exceptions include discussions involving personnel matters, matters involving specific students, consultation with an attorney, employee complaints, purchase or lease of real property and security measures.  These matters are set aside for logical reasons, like protecting the privacy of individual employees and students or not wanting to give away a negotiating position.  The board discusses the items in closed session, but all votes must later be made in an open meeting.

Proctor and Huckaby walked out of that meeting to kill the quorum and avoid voting on individual employment contracts. Blackman and Majors say there should have been public input before vote was taken.  They are wrong.  Discussion about employment contracts is  never appropriate for open discussion or public input.  Therefore, there was no reason NOT to vote on contracts in a work study meeting.  The exception to this would be the new hiring of someone whose job is of wide public interest, like a principal, where the vote should be taken after the public has had an opportunity to speak at the Open Forum part of the regular meeting.  The district is a BIG BUSINESS, one of the largest employers in west Houston, and needs to move forward in a timely matter.  


So, why are Blackman and Majors (and Proctor and Huckaby) talking about "covert proceedings"?  It is a catch phrase with no merit but lots of emotional weight.  When you vote, don't be swayed by rhetoric that is not backed up with solid information and common sense.  


Early voting continues this week through May 8; 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. at Taylor and Cinco Ranch High Schools, Wolfe Elementary, and the Education Support Complex.  

More School Board 101: The Importance of Good Relationships with Legislators

WHAT to do tonight?  I hate it when there are two parties to go to on a particular night.  ;-)

Tonight the Katy Area will have two events to choose from:  a Meet-the-Candidates night with GOP candidates for State legislature, and a town hall meeting called by Bill Proctor.  Sad.  Not because it'll be hard to go to both events.  Sad because Proctor doesn't "get it".

More on how the School Board Works:  The single group of people who most impact the school district's financial situation is NOT the school board-- it's the State legislature.  This group of people decides how much money districts get, and impose mandated programs on the districts (often with no money to make them happen).  An important part of the School Board Trustee's "job" is to meet with State and National representatives and tell them how laws they are considering will impact school districts.  That requires working relationships with people in office.  When the legislature is in session and debating education laws, it's important that they know school board members they are comfortable calling and asking about impact.  Last spring, I had several calls from a State Representative on the floor of the house who was asking "Chris, how will this work in Katy?"  The reason I was called was because I'd spent the time developing relationships with people in State and National office.

So why is Bill not only skipping an opportunity to further his relationships with folks who will be in the State Legislature, but also drawing people away from that opportunity?  I don't know.  But it is another example of his idea of "team play".

State Reps need to know how what they do impacts school districts.  If you feel that it is important for your State Legislative candidates to know YOUR priorities for education, go to tonights KAR event and let them know.   Then, let Bill know you wish he'd been there, too.

KAR:  3/28/12 @ Spring Creek BBQ on I-10 at Westgreen, 6:30-8:30.

March Board Meeting Comments

It was standing room only at the school board meeting tonight.  Twenty-four people signed up to speak in the open forum.  The vast majority (15) were people speaking about being embarrassed by last week's walk-out by Proctor & Huckaby, and asking for the grandstanding to stop.  Three spoke in support of Proctor & Huckaby's actions, one spoke in support of naming schools after educators, one spoke about a playground in the district needing additional sidewalks, a candidate for State Board of Education introduced herself, Mr. Huckaby attacked me personally, and Terri Majors and Cynthia Blackman "passed" and chose not to speak.  (Odd, since they came out last week and spoke in support of Proctor & Huckaby.  I wonder if Bill is angry they didn't follow his directions?)

Here are my comments from tonight's school board meeting:

This whole week of shenanigans has not been about Teacher and Administrator Contracts—it’s about the upcoming election.  

Here's the proof:  A mass e-mail from Mr. Proctor saying, and I quote:  “I believe that we now have another election issue.  I think the item below should appeal to taxpayers, teachers, etc.  Our candidates must say that they are committed to passing a Local Policy…”

So, taxpayers, teachers, and voters:  don’t allow yourself to be manipulated!

And Mr. Proctor:  You must decide:  Are you a campaign manager or a School Board Trustee?  If you want to be a trustee, then explain to me how walking out on a school board meeting in order to prevent the orderly process of school district business fulfills your fiduciary obligation to the students, taxpayers, staff and residents of this district.

The e-mail I referred to is here (Yellow highlighting is mine):

----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Lesa Trapp Sent: Mon, March 26, 2012

8:17:57 AM Subject: FW: Personnel Contracts

Education Support Complex, Merrell Center, Katy, TX

Katy Tea and Save Our Teachers PAC needs you to

show up at the Katy ISD BOT Regular Meeting,

Monday, March 26 at 6:30pm to support Katy ISD

teachers and BOT members Dr. Bill Proctor and Terry

Huckaby.

I need you all there tonight. It is time to take back our

schools. Lets show our signs. No more will we take it.

Thank you,

Lesa Trapp

Patriot & HC PCT Chair 618

www.lesatrapp.net

From: bproctor@consolidated.net 

To: bproctor10@gmail.com 

Subject: Personnel Contracts Date: Mon,

26 Mar 2012 06:23:09 -0500

Everyone,

I sent the information below to a few people. I am going

to follow through on the legality of this issue.

In the event that Joe is correct, I believe that we now

have another election issue. I think the item below

should appeal to taxpayers, teachers, etc.

Our candidates must say that they are committed to

passing a Local Policy that gives the Board the

responsibility for reviewing and approving the language

in all personnel contracts. They want ensure that the

Board exercises its fiduciary responsibility for contracts

and budgets.

Everyone,

I find Joe’s explanation very hard to believe. We may

have been following this procedure over the years but it

does not seem legal to me.

Bill

How School Boards Work, Part III: Who's the Boss?

Saw a comment in that other blog that Bill Proctor is Alton Frailey's boss.  I'd like to clarify that misconception.  Alton Frailey's boss is the Board of Trustees acting as a body corporate.  Think about how horrible a band would sound if instead of having a single conductor, the brass, percussion, woodwinds, and horns all had separate conductors.  If each section played at different tempos, and the horns wanted to play a waltz instead of a march, the music would be a mess!  State law is pretty smart in this instance:  Having 7 trustees ensures the values of the community are woven into all decisions, but by insisting they act as a single unit, they avoid the total confusion of superintendents getting 7 sets of directions.  


The job of the Superintendent is, in a nutshell, to educate students and manage the resources of the district.  Since Alton Frailey has been in Katy ISD, student test scores have improved, the district continues to win awards for financial management practices, transparency, and for achieving significant student academic growth while keeping spending relatively low, and in 2010 he was awarded Superintendent of the Year for Region IV.  


My hope, as a taxpayer and as a person concerned about the students of this community, is that Alton Frailey will focus his energies and talents on running the district, rather than baby-sitting a board that is dysfunctional because two of its members' goal is to derail the business of the district for an election-time publicity stunt.  I also hope that the board will get its act together before they "distract" this district to disaster.

So, Why DID They Walk Out?

Got a question from Jenni: (read her entire comment on the posting "Proctor and Huckaby Take Their Ball and Go Home")
I'm so confused here I can't make heads or tails, and I'm hoping you can help. Did Proctor and Huckaby walk out because it was inappropriate to take a vote on that issue (offering administrators the 2-year contracts) at THAT TIME, and would it have been possible for them to publicly protest the vote at the time of the meeting? Could they have had the board delay that vote and then stay to take part in OTHER matters? Do you think it's appropriate to ask to grant 2-year contracts to administrators --with cuts coming down the pike (it sounds like Frailey wants to protect his "cronies"-- is THAT the case?)? It's obvious that games are being played, but I'm not familiar enough with how this is supposed to work to make a clear judgment on who is doing what and whether or not it's "o.k."! 
These are great questions!  
Let's take the last question first and talk about the games being played:  P&H absolutely could have stayed and protested the vote at the time of the meeting.  In fact, that is their duty as Trustees.  A lot of other business needed to be handled besides the 2-year contracts.  From the agenda and my experience, I would guess there were a lot of specific terminations and "RILT" (Resign in lieu of termination) for teachers who are not doing a good job.  Those have to happen at the end of the contract cycle, and by a certain date under Texas law.  You are absolutely right: games are being played here... and when P&H play those games, it derails the business of running the district.  

So, why did they do it that way (walk out rather than vote "no" or abstain)?  This is my opinion:  I don't think it would have changed the outcome of the vote even if all 7 Trustees were present.  So what was their point?  It was for the Theatrics.  We have an election coming up, and they wanted everyone to remember how angry everyone was last year about teacher layoffs, because that is what got them elected, and they are desperate to have two more buds on the board.  Walking out and stealing the quorum wouldn't have changed the outcome, but it gave them an opportunity to get the attention of the press.  On Tuesday, Mrs. Majors sent an inflammatory e-mail to teachers that indicated she and Mrs. Blackman are the only ones running who care about teachers.  Coincidence?  I doubt it... To consider this further:  who REALLY has the best interests of the teachers at heart?  Not P&H: they chose to hold up the contracts of over 4000 teachers with a stunt.  

About voting that night versus later:  It was completely appropriate to vote on contracts at that meeting, and if we put it in context of the school year, it makes better sense.  This is the time of year that teachers and administrators start looking for new positions, because they are all on contracts that keep them from doing it in the middle of the year.  If teachers and administrators are not getting a contract this time of year, it makes jobs in other districts look that much more appealing.  It is the piece of paper they have to have to buy a home as it shows they have employment.  Holding up those contracts does them a great disservice.  


Educator Contracts 101:  All professional staff work under contract.  There are two kinds; "term" and "probationary".  Probationary contracts are usually given to people in the first year or two of a new assignment.  Once they have a "term" contract, they basically have a never-ending job, because in order to fire them, the district has to have documented cause.  In addition, it is very expensive to let a term-contract teacher go because they have  the right to a number of hearings, which are very expensive for the district.  That was why the teachers who were given pink slips last year were probationary-contract teachers, because if the district had let go term teachers and they all pursued hearings, it could have cost the district millions. 


P&H would have you believe everyone working in the admin building get the 2 year contracts, while those on campuses only get one-year.  NOT TRUE.  Of all the "administrator" contracts, only 80-ish are 2-year contracts.  With 50+ campuses, the vast majority went to principals, and the remainder went to heads of departments, like the chief of police or head of operations or accountability/assessment, etc. Here's why 2-year contracts are offered to some administrators:  Who gets one is driven by supply and demand.  There are few people who can do the job of a campus principal or head a department, and they are in greater demand.  By giving those folks 2-year contracts, it locks them in and protects the district from loosing an asset that the district developed and invested in!  How many administrators do you know who left us to find a bigger job at another district because KISD trained them so well!  Tying them to a two-year contract helps to keep them at work here.  It's not about protecting cronies; it's protecting an asset of the district.  


Tragedy is, reviewing the POLICY of giving 2 year contracts now, while the State funding is so uncertain, is a good idea; however I've been told that there was no attempt by P&H to put that question on the agenda  One other Trustee has told me privately he would have supported putting that question on the agenda, but not to hold up the awarding of all the teacher contracts.  But P&H didn't do that.  But it doesn't matter if Bill Proctor has a good ideas or not, if he presents them to the press rather than the board.  His value as a board member is diminished because everyone with any sense is reluctant to deal with him when he chooses to do the business of the district in INK.  

Proctor and Huckaby Take their Ball and Go Home

Well, theater lovers enjoyed quite the spectacle this evening!  After the closed session, the board members entered the boardroom and, like any other meeting, started greeting the spectators who were in attendance.  I saw Bill Proctor, Terry Huckaby, Rebecca Fox, Joe Adams, and Neal Howard.  Henry Dibrell is in Africa on a mission trip with the Amobi Okoye Foundation, and Robert Shaw continues to recover from major surgery.  The next thing I realized, the board members had all vanished!  Well, that prompted some chatter, but sure enough, in about 15 minutes in walk Fox, Adams, Howard and Robert Shaw! 

They started the meeting, and took votes on the closed session items.  Apparently, Shaw had not been present in the closed session, because he recused himself from the appeal of a grievance because he hadn’t been at the hearing.  As the votes were tallied, Mr. Adams noted that Mr. Dibrell was out of town and, “…Mr. Huckaby and Mr. Proctor have left the building.” 

What does THAT mean?  Did Proctor and Huckaby leave in order to close down the meeting for lack of a quorum?  Did a recovering Bob Shaw have to be called in to make sure 4 members were present so that the business of the district could be conducted? 

These theatrics are reminiscent of the shenanigans of the Texas Democrats who high-tailed it to Ardmore, OK to make a political point.  Or similar theatrics in Wisconsin and Indiana.  As a taxpayer, this just makes me MAD.  How dare they waste the time of the district patrons and of the employees present!  How dare they derail the work of the district!  Yes, it was “just” a work-study meeting, and nothing was voted on other than the personnel matters from closed session, but those are important votes that keep the district moving forward in an orderly way!  They also gave up their chance to ask questions and discuss the matters that were on the discussion agenda.  Since that is the only way that divergent views and values are factored into the decisions of the board, they failed in their duty as Trustees to be at the dais and to contribute to the decision.  For THEATER!  Shame on them!

Apparently, Proctor and Huckaby each handed the press a press release, so this was not the case of a spontaneous response to something that happened at the meeting.  It was a calculated political maneuver to… What???  Well, think about what THEIR agenda is.  I think it’s pretty clear they are willing to throw the work of the district under the bus in order to make a political point, especially now that there is an election in less than two months.  REALLY??  And how embarrassing for Katy ISD.  This district used to be the envy of others all around the State.  It is antics like this that will paint us a laughing stock….   And when we have a reputation as having a thoroughly dysfunctional school board, what businesses will relocate here?  What great teachers and administrators will want to work here?  What people will want their children educated here?  What will happen to our home values and quality of life?  

Schools are a community asset under assault

Excitement in our neighborhood:  a house sold recently after a bidding war-- shows the truth of my father-in-law's #1 rule of real estate: "choose a home based on three things: location, location and location".  


Of course, the winning bidder has school aged children.  That, after all, is the reason the vast majority of people move here.  As I get older I do see more older people moving to the Katy area, but when I dig deeper into why they moved here, the conversation usually rolls around to their grandchildren in KISD!  


The value of our homes is greater than in other areas because people move here for the schools.  Katy ISD has been a "destination district" for many years because we as a community have made schools a high priority.  But our community has also demanded fiscal responsibility, and this district has been a good steward of our tax dollars, giving us "bang for our bucks".  


This is proven by the many awards Katy ISD has racked up for fiscal responsibility.  At last week's school board meeting, the district recognized the financial department for once again earning a Texas Comptroller's Gold Leadership Circle award for "setting the bar for transparency efforts".  In recent months, they have also received the Financial Allocation Study for Texas for "Honors Circle" rating, which recognizes school districts that have achieved significant student academic growth while keeping spending relatively low.  (And to those who poo-poo these awards as being something every district can get, think again.   Only 35 ISDs (out of 1029) earned the accolade.)  For the last 9 years, Katy ISD has also earned "Superior Achievement" from the TEA for the Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas.  The purpose of the FIRST system is to ensure that school districts are held accountable for the quality of their financial management practices and achieve improved performance in the management of their financial resources, and to encourage districts to manage their financial resources in order to provide the maximum allocation possible for direct instructional purposes.

Nota bene:  These accolades take a year or two to get to the "presses", so these awards are based on, at best, 2010 data.  The changes the district has seen over the last year with the election of 3 new board members, two of whom seem to have the sole agenda of tearing down the district, is yet to be seen.  The District is at a crossroads, and the election in May 2012 will be all about deciding what kind of district we want to live in:  one that people flock to because of a student-centered outlook that focuses on increased academic achievement, or one that focuses on the theatrical exercise that is foment for foment's sake.     

This weeks's school board work-study meeting was interesting, in a depressing sort of way.  The contentious atmosphere is turning into a circus, and no student is being educated nor any district property being maintained nor any goal-setting being done because of the circus.  Sad.  


Last week's meeting was capped off by School Board President Joe Adams attempting to offer a report to the other board members that he had tasked Mr. Frailey to produce.  Dr. Proctor interrupted with a Point of Order and demanded a Legal Opinion interpreting the Open Meetings Act.  Basically, he wanted to shut down any conversation about the report.  Since Mr. Adams wasn't offering it for discussion but just to hand out the report in written form, there was no conversation to shut down, but here is a big picture question:  Why is Dr. Proctor opposed to the discussion of things?  I thought he was all about transparency and fiscal responsibility?  Instead, he is demanding a lawyer be paid to offer an opinion to shut down discussion?  Hmm.  


An aside:  Sometimes I feel I've fallen through the Looking Glass:  Several months ago, the Board took up 2 questions: should bond "savings" be used to build an additional elementary school ($22 million-ish) and should the tax office be outsourced to the counties (about a $60,000 question).  The "fiscal conservatives" on the board were all over the small potatoes question, and it was Joe Adams and Rebecca Fox who put the kibosh on building a new school that we don't really need right now.  Thank you to them for continuing to steward my tax dollars...Did the other "news" blog report that?  No....  


Here is my main point:  All this spitting and spewing is not good for kids.  Frailey & Board: please, please, please:  Find the BIG PICTURE (student success) and keep your eye on the ball.  The report that was prepared by Mr. Frailey (it's on the KISD website) is over 60 pages long and must represent HOURS and HOURS of staff time, to defend a situation that two errant and big-mouthed board members have created.  The contentiousness in the Board Room is like pouring molasses on the Administration and that WILL impact students.  If I may mix my metaphors:  Stirring the pot is good for entertainment, but if everyone is rowing in a different direction, don't be surprised if the boat capsizes.  Do NOT be contentious just for political gain.  


Furthermore, that molasses isn't sweet:  Everyone from our highest performing administrators to the janitors will be looking for a more hospitable work-place.  Once they leave, who will replace them?  Or do the work?  And that molasses will continue to run-- right onto campuses, and then it will REALLY impact student success.  I know Dr. Proctor is very anxious that another "reformer" get elected in May, so that he can have "the power".  But to what END???  Yikes!  Have a goal, for heaven's sake!  And please let it be about students, and not power for power's sake...