Search The Tattler

Monday, July 2, 2012

School Board Gives Citizens Brush Off...Again

From The Secret News:

Thank You All for Coming …

June 29, 2012
By Tracy Schroth
Emeryville parents and residents have done a lot to try and convince the Emeryville School District Board of Trustees to save Anna Yates Elementary School. For several years, dissenters have publicly and privately raised their objections to the Board’s plan to combine grades K-12 on one campus and close Anna Yates. A letter signed by 12 residents, including current PTO members and the former presidents of both the PTO and the District’s Board of Trustees, was sent to Board members last May urging them to keep Anna Yates students where they are. Meanwhile, more than 60 people signed petition in support of that letter and many made comments next to their signatures explaining their reasons for wanting to save Anna Yates. The school recently underwent a renovation costing almost $9 million.
In response, this is what the Board of Education has done:  Nothing.
So it came as no surprise to parents and residents attending last Monday’s Board meeting when....

For the rest of the story, please click HERE.


  1. Sour Grapes that the minority doesn't rule?

    1. The School Board would appear to agree with you! As in; School Boards should never listen to dissent coming from the rabble...just smile and thank them for coming. A parent (or citizen) that disagrees with the Board should be summarily discounted, right?

    2. not doing what you want them to do and not listening are two different things. they listened, but stood behind their decision to move forward with a plan that will benefit all students in our community.

    3. When that dissent adds up to a total of 1% of the population, they should.

    4. The Tattler would like to thank the School Board member (above) for the comments. It's always helpful to know how our elected officials think about public policy and the role of citizens (if there even is one). Thanks again for your comments.

  2. I love how you think anyone who disagrees with you is either an public official or a staff member. Clearly the previous anonymous poster(s) are not. They're just members of the majority who are pointing out the obvious.

    1. I've always thought it's good to be a skeptic. Like for instance it's valuable to ask yourself if the wealthy would be served by lying as they seek to manipulate public policy. If they are well served by lying and if they have the resources to promulgate a lie, what are the odds then that they would lie? Any rational person comes to the conclusion that the most likely scenario is that wealthy people will lie to protect their power and wealth. So even if a skeptic is unfamiliar with the particulars of some situational politics, the above maxim will serve to elucidate and inform.

      This dynamic can be applied to the global warming debate. The right wing wants people to be skeptical about it...but do they really? This debate has the oil industry on one side and climate scientists on the other. A real skeptic will use the maxim about the corrupting influence of money and come to the conclusion that the oil industry has the most to gain by lying (vs climate scientists) and they also have the greater capacity to lie. The rational deduction is that the most likely side lying in the global warming debate, by far, is the oil industry.

      So goes politics in the national debate and so goes politics in Emeryville. A little skepticism is always well advised.