http://pleasantonweekly.com/square/print/2012/08/30/staggered-start


Town Square

Staggered Start

Original post made by Lynne on Aug 30, 2012

How are other schools handling the staggered start for K-3rd? Initially the district said that "at minimum" playground supervision would be offered. Now that doesn't appear to be the case. This greatly impacts many families and it seems the district could have done some pre-planning on this front. As it is currently at Vintage Hills, it is only a matter of time until a child is lost or taken in all of the chaos!

Comments

Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 30, 2012 at 10:03 pm

I have no idea what is going on. For the first 3 weeks, why are elementary schools dismissing children earlier --- at different times for grades 1-3. Why is there no consistency?

Some schools are dismissing at 1:55, some at 2:05, some later.

This has been a poorly communicated fiasco so far.


Posted by Personally..., a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 30, 2012 at 10:20 pm

Personally, we've had excellent communication from our daughter's school. I've known about the early/late reading programs and why they've been implemented. I also am very aware that if Pleasanton bothered passing a Parcel Tax, this wouldn't have happened.

I know the Tea Partiers out there will claim that this is an evil, liberal government conspiracy. Personally, I think they have no clue what they are talking about and are spoiled brats because they hate government, yet feel it should provide everything they need. It is only going to get worse if the taxes aren't passed in November. And if they aren't, Pleasanton will only do what the state recommends, which is 15 furlough days between the months of January and June. Parents will complain that they didn't receive enough notice. But in reality, it will be the fault of those who didn't bother to educate themselves or vote.


Posted by Personally..., a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 30, 2012 at 10:27 pm

One more thought. I cannot find one document that says school districts legally need to provide playground supervision to students before and after school. Legally, they need to provide a school day that meets the minimum number of minutes. If you hate what is going on, do something about it. Organize the community and make sure the district has funds, whether it's through PPIE, a parcel tax, or the November tax. Understand that our district has been going above and beyond for years. We are spoiled. Now due to budget cuts, they cannot give into our every need.

Get over yourself. The school district is here to serve your child during the mandatory school day. Before and after care is not the district's problem. This is what happens when money is tight.


Posted by actually, a resident of Apperson Ridge
on Aug 31, 2012 at 12:29 am

Please explain how our district has been able to afford going above and beyond for so many years? Where did the money come from for the 100k salaries when other districts can't afford this?

In many states property taxes do pay for education locally. Here things are done more by the state. The state needs to fix this because they're planning to take the money from the well off districts anyhow.


Posted by actually, a resident of Apperson Ridge
on Aug 31, 2012 at 12:31 am

Oh and by the way, the shorter day is not a good plan and has no cost savings attached to it and parents are not happy. We could be back to the full day with no cost implications or actually save money.


Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 31, 2012 at 12:55 am

Personally, you are very incorrect (hope you don't work for the school district.) You said, incorrectly, that school districts are not legally required to provide playground supervision to students before and after school. That is completely false.

By law, school districts legally must provide supervision to students before and after school, and if they fail to supervise students and tragedy occurs, they are liable. See 5 CCR 5552, Education Code 44807, and Government Code 815.6.

This is well established in case law.

In Hoyem v. Manhattan Beach City Sch. Dist., a 10 year old left the school campus due to negligence supervision of the campus and was struck by a motorcycle. The District was held liable for a student's injuries which were proximately caused by the district's failure to exercise reasonable care.

In M.W. v. Panama Buena Vista Union School District. In this case, a special education student filed suit against a school district after the child was sodomized by another student in the school bathroom prior to the beginning of class. The jury returned a $2 million verdict. The assault occurred on the school's watch, was caused by the school's indifference toward the dangers posed by failing to adequately supervise its students, particularly special education students. The evidence showed that despite the fact the school's gates were unlocked at approximately 7:00 a.m., no adult was charged with the specific responsibility of supervising the students until 7:45.

In Dailey v. Los Angeles Unified School, a child was killed on the playground. His parents brought a wrongful death action against the Los Angeles Unified School District which operated Gardena High School and against two teachers employed by the district. The parents won.

The list goes on....



Posted by actually, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 31, 2012 at 8:22 am

You're wrong about this one too: "It is only going to get worse if the taxes aren't passed in November. And if they aren't, Pleasanton will only do what the state recommends, which is 15 furlough days between the months of January and June. Parents will complain that they didn't receive enough notice."

The district has already budgeted for the risk that the taxes will not pass. That is why we lost so much this year. If they do pass we'll get programs back and have a surplus. If they don't, well the damage has already been done.


Posted by Correction..., a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 1, 2012 at 11:03 am

Oh personally....- you make some false claims...

"Personally, we've had excellent communication from our daughter's school. I've known about the early/late reading programs and why they've been implemented. I also am very aware that if Pleasanton bothered passing a Parcel Tax, this wouldn't have happened."

The parcel tax would NOT have saved class size reduction!! CSR is a very expensive endeavor and would require a much, much larger tax to be fully-supported. Also the language in the tax did not specify the funds would go exclusively to CSR. That's what they need to do if they want people "on board" for the tax - specify how it will be used - otherwise we all know that money gets "moved around".


Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 1, 2012 at 3:25 pm

The duty to supervise students is imposed on the school district even after the school instructional day ends, according to the California Supreme Court.

Web Link

What will be the staffing ratio of this so-called "playground supervision" before and after school?


Posted by john, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 1, 2012 at 5:55 pm

"The parcel tax would NOT have saved ..."

That's not quite true either. A parcel tax may not have saved CSR completely, but it may have meant the difference between a class size of 27 for some classes versus the current 30. Measure G would have done more than Measure E. I would have voted for the amount of Measure G + Measure E, if possible, because I think the district would have put it to good use.


Posted by Correction..., a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 1, 2012 at 6:58 pm

John - that is *exactly* the point....may have saved/may not have saved - who knows? It was not clear what programs would have been protected by a parcel tax - this is why many people opposed it.

And for the record, I don't think most parents in favor of CSR would be appeased by a 27:1 ratio versus 30:1. They want *real* reductions - if that's what their votes got them, you'd still hear complaints!!

I'm glad *you* trust the district to put the $$ to good use....many in this community do not share your level of trust...


Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore
on Sep 1, 2012 at 7:54 pm

As a senior citizen, I admit to preferring a long day to a short night.


Posted by Julie, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 1, 2012 at 8:24 pm

Julie is a registered user.

I don't understand why a school should have to supervise children before or after school hours. A gate is unlocked at 7:00 a.m. and a parent thinks they can just leave their student there (particularly a special needs student?). That's the parent's fault for making a poor choice. Just because a lawsuit is won doesn't mean it was truly fair or just or even made any sense. I heard a school principal in Dublin reminding parents that there is no supervision until 15 min. before school starts. I pass by a half an hour before school begins and there are children milling about. Parents dump them off and rush to work. Or, they leave home on their own and get there early. It's school, not day care!


Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 1, 2012 at 9:08 pm

By law, school districts legally must provide supervision to students before and after school, and if they fail to supervise students and tragedy occurs, they are liable. See 5 CCR 5552, Education Code 44807, and Government Code 815.6.

Schools attempt to place blame on the parents and children for their failure to hire competent personnel and instead hire incompetent people who are moved around from school to school (they move them around the district when there are complaints rather than fire them). It is not the parents' fault that schools are incompetent. The parent of this special needs student was a teacher in the school district and was never told that it was not okay to drop the child off at that time. In fact, she had to in order to get to her teaching job.

Schools must ensure the safety of the campus from time they open the gates in the morning to the time they close them after afterschool programs are finished.

A couple of people in yard duty vests standing there and chatting about the latest gossip while sipping their Starbucks coffee doesn't cut it.


Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 1, 2012 at 9:15 pm

This article provides all the information regarding California law in student supervision and what will happen if PUSD fails to protect the children, per Lynne's of Vintage Hills Elementary original posting:

Web Link


Posted by Julie, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 1, 2012 at 11:32 pm

Julie is a registered user.

Regarding the special ed student, the abuse happened:

"when the campus was open to students but with no organized supervision." Again, I would not leave my child (particularly a special needs child) on any grounds unless I was certain there was supervision. I would make contact with the supervising adult.

I agree children should be safe on campus during compulsory activities (school) and non-compulsory activities (dances, etc.).

It says the school can simply not allow students on campus before school. That's what I would do! I would want my staff preparing for their class, not babysitting. There wouldn't even be enough staff if for some crazy reason every family decided to dump their kids at school an hour or so before school.


Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 1, 2012 at 11:57 pm

The bullying of special needs students happens at campuses in Pleasanton all the time because the school district does not provide adequate supervision for special needs children.

For example, at Hart Middle School, in December 2007, a child with Down's Syndrome with limited communication skills was bullied after school while going downstairs. Students would not let the child pass to go downstairs. They told the child to jump, and the child climbed over the wall and fell from a second story building and dropped to the ground. The District called 911 and the child was transported to the hospital.


Posted by john, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 2, 2012 at 4:45 pm

"may have saved/may not have saved ... this is why many people opposed it."

It would be crazy for the district to be that specific, to say something like "if this parcel tax passes, class sizes will be 20 for k-3 for the period of the tax." As soon as some unforeseen problem crops up, say another unexpected shortfall in funds caused by an economic downturn, the district's hands would be tied.

" ... if that's what their votes got them, you'd still hear complaints"

You're going to hear complaints regardless. Class size could go to one per class and there would be complaints. That is human nature.

"...many in this community do not share your level of trust..."

And through both campaigns, I haven't seen anything egregious. There was talk of car allowances, and cell phones, a bond refinancing that some people thought was questionable, but I haven't seen or heard anything that was much worse here than at any of the other well run, high achieving districts in the Bay Area. Test scores have been consistently good here, and that is why families like mine moved here years ago. What saddens me is that the current generation with kids in K-3 won't get near the quality of education that mine got. A substantial parcel tax will go a long way in fixing that.

In my opinion, based on demographic changes and simple time series analysis, the next parcel tax effort is likely to pass, and subsequent efforts will likely pass by larger margins. Households with school age children continue to move into Pleasanton and Households without continue to leave. I think it will be a good thing for Pleasanton.


Posted by Judy, a resident of Val Vista
on Sep 3, 2012 at 8:52 am

I still haven't seen many cuts to the administration part of education. Only from the things that matter to the students. Do you think this is right? No tax increase would be needed if the high end salaries didn't need to be paid.


Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Sep 3, 2012 at 9:30 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

John, a parcel tax would not have saved CSR--ask San Ramon. Even Palo Alto increased class size, though not as much.

As to nothing egregious, you need to go back and see the damage done by the previous administration and follow some of the continued issues even now. I'm not going to rehash it here.

There was no organized effort for the no campaign. A third attempt with the notion that demographics have changed enough to beat an organized campaign is foolish.

That said, a new parcel tax must be specific, and all K-12 parents need to decide what they value most. I'm not certain that would be a parcel tax that saves only CSR at the elementary grade levels. There have been losses in other key areas at all grade levels. If a tax covers counselors and VPs and reading specialists or art and music, then the money not used from the general fund for those costs is available for the board's discretion for other areas. I don't buy the party line about a tax having to provide flexibility.


Posted by Concerned and KNOW what's going on, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 3, 2012 at 11:20 am

First, let's get things straight: this was decided upon secretly, and not communicated until the last day of school, so the district could insulate itself from the backlash they knew they would justifiably receive. Second, on the first day of school, they announced a modified schedule that would take place THE NEXT MORNING !!! Not only is this program a complete fiasco, it is being implemented poorly.

Second, the school district claims they need these 3 weeks to "assess" the students in 1-3 top place in the proper class. However, the teachers state there will be no assessment, that the kids will generally get what the parents request. So, add FARCE to FIASCO.

Third, the ONLY reason that the students are being taught less, is because the UNIONS don't want the teachers working more for less pay. That is wrong. In the private sector, employees have had their benefits cut, 401k matching reduced, endured pay cuts across the board. In addition, employees are working longer hours. I am not saying this is right or wrong, necessarily as that is a separate topic all together. However, the point is that EVERYONE needs to make the sacrifices, even union-backed teachers. And they say the teachers care about the children... Yeah, right. Think of it: a parcel tax will not get rid of the waste, but will only add to it. Governments need to learn to live within their means. That goes for school districts, as well. Read another article - school scores are also up. So school districts can do more with less. This is a good thing! However, the unions are hurting our kids.


Posted by Nurse Shark, a resident of Bridle Creek
on Sep 3, 2012 at 1:19 pm

You people are wasting your time trying to explain to Staceleen that the language of such a tax MUST not be overly specific. She simply cannot process the reasoning. She is so convinced by her own under-informed perceptions that she is like someone who cannot accept that the world is not flat. To her, it IS, and it seems so obvious to her that the rest of us sound like we're talking crazy. No amount of logic or demonstration will convince her otherwise.


Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 3, 2012 at 2:27 pm

There is very poor communication.

Why does Donlon Elementary have a secret Bell Schedule that you need a password to access? Click and a message comes up saying a password is needed--- Web Link . When you click on the bell schedule Web Link it says you aren't authorized to view it.

I looked at the other schools' websites and their bell schedules, but they are mainly the same, but Mohr has this strange. What is this? Web Link ? I thought that staggered days the children had 285 minutes of instructional time according to the district FAQs.

Yet on another link on the website, they are dismissing children at 1:55-why is Mohr releasing students 10 minutes earlier than the other schools --- is it true have the School Board gave a waiver to have less instructional minutes? Did the School Board really cancel the last recess for Grades 1 through 3? The website on the PUSD server Web Link differs from the principal's own Google website (why are they using Google?) that lists the dismissal at 1:55, ten minutes earlier? Web Link

What a mess.


Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Sep 3, 2012 at 3:17 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Nurse, I understand the claim perfectly well and disagree wholeheartedly. Nothing presented in either parcel tax attempt or the committee prior to the second attempt gave factual evidence for not using specific language. It's always been "We can't tie the district's hands; they need flexibility . . . just in case." Language that says, for instance, "to maintain K-3 class sizes at 25:1, with a 2% annual increase" covers adjustments to teacher salaries per the salary schedule (step and column) for those grades, reinstates a program that is no longer in place, and thus does not create a drain on the general fund. You can do this for counselors, reading specialists, library time, Barton reading, vice principals, teacher aides, secretarial time, custodial time . . .


Posted by john, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 3, 2012 at 4:12 pm

"As to nothing egregious, you need to go back and see the damage done by the previous administration and follow some of the continued issues even now."

Been there, done that. As I said, nothing egregious.

"I still haven't seen many cuts to ... "

Not passing a parcel tax won't do anything to change that.

"No tax increase would be needed if the high end salaries didn't need to be paid."

Any way I've seen it presented cut's in administrative perks wouldn't have saved even CSR. There isn't enough money there.


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Sep 3, 2012 at 4:13 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

No logic to demonstrate why a parcel tax MUST have language so general as to be unaccountable even with an oversight committee. Poor, poor Nurse Shark. Expects others to believe her without question. And pigs fly.


Posted by john, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 3, 2012 at 4:20 pm

"There was no organized effort for the no campaign"

There was an organized effort -- web sites, lawn signs, well funded supporters -- What town have you been living in?

" an organized campaign is foolish." Claiming there wasn't one and would be in the future is foolish.

"That said, a new parcel tax must be specific..."

No, it just needs to be on the ballot. Measure G or E. Run the numbers. Have you done time series analysis?


Posted by john, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 3, 2012 at 4:30 pm

To "Nurse",

I didn't know that "Kathleen" and "Stacey" were the same person. Is that true?

Kathleen/Stacey, if you are the same person, why not just use one name to post here? It gets confusing.

As to the parcel tax issue. The question is if, it is when and how much at this point. It may bring k-3 class sizes to 28 or something, or it may not.


Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Sep 3, 2012 at 4:44 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

It was a grass roots effort that didn't do fundraising. Those involved have indicated they would organize a formal campaign if needed. Two assumptions: more yes voters will show up, and no more no voters will. Where are we--some half a million spent zand hundreds of volunteer hours with no success You can keep running the same experiment and run the risk of losing, or you can change the approach and move some no votes to the yes side.


Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Sep 3, 2012 at 4:46 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

No, John, we are not the same person. It's a game the troll likes to play.


Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 3, 2012 at 5:01 pm

I believe putting a handout in backpacks the last day of the school year disrespects the members of the community. I believe that the superintendent and president disrespect their colleagues who were were voted into office and are elected representatives of the voters. The president gavels her own colleagues to stop speaking and the superintendent interrupts her own staff professionals, contradicts them in public meetings, and make them appear incompetent. This behavior is ridiculous. Policy decisions without community coordination and communication are irresponsible.


Posted by Nurse Shark, a resident of Bridle Creek
on Sep 3, 2012 at 5:16 pm

To john:

As you've just witnessed, both Stacey and Kathleen tend to speak up at almost the exact same time with the exact same agenda. This has been going on very conspicuously for years now, and regulars on the forum have long ago caught on that the "twin" voices are in fact just one voice popping up to give the illusion of support to itself. Some people think that "liberalism is a disease" is also an attack persona of Staceleen, but I'm not yet convinced that this is so.


Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Sep 3, 2012 at 5:41 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Nurse, lies and you know it. As has been repeated here often, just call the staff at The Weekly. I have no reason to use more than one name.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Laguna Oaks
on Sep 3, 2012 at 6:56 pm

Oh, please Stacey/Kathleen. When are you going to cut out the nonsense?


Posted by john, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 3, 2012 at 8:02 pm

" You can keep running the same experiment ..."

They aren't running the same experiment. The parameters are changing.

"... they would organize a formal campaign ... "

If "they" did that, it is just as likely to backfire as not. There may not be as many Grover Norquist voters in Pleasanton as you think.


Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 3, 2012 at 8:03 pm

This thread is about Staggered Start and the lack of pre-planning and the lack of communication, lack of consistency, and lack of coordination regarding Staggered Start.

[By the way, Stacey and Kathleen are two different people.]

If you want to have a 'cheer for a new parcel tax' thread, why don't you start another thread, John? Nurse?


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Sep 3, 2012 at 8:25 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

What we're really witnessing is the inability of one side to argue the merits of their ideas against different ideas. As expected, nary a word as to why a parcel tax MUST have language that's as loose as a two-bit [not fit for this website].


Posted by Nurse Shark, a resident of Bridle Creek
on Sep 3, 2012 at 9:10 pm

Weird how Stacey and Kathleen are again "of one mind" within the last few posts...


Posted by john, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 3, 2012 at 9:33 pm

To "Random acts",

It appears that "Stacey", and "Kathleen" are just as interested in discussing the merits of a parcel tax as I am. Why was your invitation just directed to me an "Nurse Shark"?

To "Stacey",

"What we're really witnessing..."

Can you please point to something I said that led you to believe that I am unable to "merits of my ideas"? Were you addressing your comments to me? I said it thought it would unnecessarily tie the districts hands.

I didn't know that we were on opposite "sides" of the parcel tax issue. Are the sides defined as for/against a parcel tax, or for/against some kind of specific language in a parcel tax?


Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 3, 2012 at 9:42 pm

Great. Start another thread. This is about Staggered Start.

It isn't about fishing for tidbits to discern about 'organization' of a parcel tax opposition group, or get the latest tidbits on the latest "egregious" actions that people are up in arms about.

It is about how Staggered Start is or is not being implemented at various locations.


Posted by Julie, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 3, 2012 at 10:21 pm

FYI so that some of you can concentrate on the actual issues and not on the posters: I don't think you can post on the same thread under two different names.


Posted by Nurse Shark, a resident of Bridle Creek
on Sep 3, 2012 at 11:14 pm

John, I did warn you against engaging Staceleen. Do you see what I mean? Logic rolls off like water off a duck's umbrella.

Julie, yes, it is possible to post under multiple names. Maybe it's not something everyone could work out how to do, but some people are more motivated to do so than a normal poster would be.


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Sep 4, 2012 at 12:04 am

Stacey is a registered user.

John,

No, that post wasn't about you.


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Sep 4, 2012 at 12:07 am

Stacey is a registered user.

I imagine the difference in time start and end times between the schools has to do lessening the impact school times have on traffic.


Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 4, 2012 at 12:16 am

Looks like with the added crossing guards needed for longer times M, T, Th and F, plus these additional supervision staff needed, this staggered start/end will end up costing even *more* money than if the school day stayed the same.

I wonder how much money this will be, measured to the nearest increment of $155,000 (John Casey's annual retirement pay each year for doing absolutely nothing...more than most people make working a full time job in the private sector!!! --- I see the Chronicle's article 'Retired schools chiefs earn big pensions' from today's edition at Web Link



Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Sep 4, 2012 at 12:20 am

Stacey is a registered user.

Even so, staggered reading may still cost less than CSR. It is difficult to say without the data.


Posted by Random acts of lack of coordination, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 4, 2012 at 12:28 am

And I'll bet a set of SRA reading cards with different levels by color for each class in Grades 1 - 3 costs a fraction of Staggered Reading and CSR.

In first through third grades, the teacher used to work with half the class in reading while the other half of the class worked on independent reading using the SRA reading cards. This is a simple solution. And the instructional day remains the same.


Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Sep 4, 2012 at 10:05 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Resident and NurseShark, take it off line. I am happy to invite you to my home.

As to the staggered starts and poor communication, there was a lot of support for keeping the position that included covering Public Information. The position of Assistant Supt. for Curriculum Services was also filled. So is not telling parents important information negligence or purposeful?


Posted by Nurse Shark, a resident of Bridle Creek
on Sep 4, 2012 at 4:07 pm

Can I get a look at your birth certificate and tax returns while I'm over?


Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Sep 4, 2012 at 4:11 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Birth certificate? Sure. Tax returns; why?


Posted by Glitches in the system, a resident of Birdland
on Sep 6, 2012 at 2:49 pm

To: Random acts of lack of coordination - there was a problem with the Donlon website that was causing all links that linked to a document (not a website) to request a password - the problem wasn't just with the bell schedule document - so the school wasn't trying to hide anything. The outage only lasted approximately 4 days. It has been fixed

Don't be so paranoid - there is no hidden agenda!