|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce’s Business and Community Political Action Committee has voted to endorse incumbent board member Joan Laursen and challenger Paige Wright for election to the Pleasanton school board.
Eric “Otis” Nostrand, chairman of the the committee, also known as BACPAC, said the endorsements were based on the written responses to a questionnaire the chamber sent to the four candidates in the race.
Laursen and another incumbent Jeff Bowser are seeking re-election on Nov. 4, with challengers Wright and Mark Miller also seeking election to the two seats available in the coming election.
Nostrand cited the candidates’ alignment with objectives in the chamber’s published goals in its “Pleasanton 2015: A Community Vision” position paper as well as a review of the incumbent candidates’ track records as reasons for the endorsements.
“In this election, we believe the Pleasanton Unified School District will benefit most from an infusion of fresh perspective, and continuity that comes with experience,” Nostrand said.
He continued:
“In challengers Mark Miller and Paige Wright, we see fresh perspective. Between the two, Wright is the stronger and best qualified. She has a track record of engagement in local classrooms and spent the better part of the past two years actively listening to a range of community stakeholders, while learning a great deal about district governance and direction.
“We are encouraged by Mark Miller’s recent interest and thoughtful candidacy, and if not elected in November, we hope he remains engaged.
“Specific to the business community, this past year it was troubling that incumbents Jeff Bowser and Joan Laursen were part of a rushed PUSD board
vote to endorse proposed changes to Prop 13 without consideration of the economic impact on commercial properties and businesses in Pleasanton and throughout California. This was doubly troubling given the business community’s consistent support for district-sponsored local funding ballot measures over the years.
“That said, we believe experience and continuity are especially important in the coming years given recent changes by the state that impact funding and performance measurement.
“Joan Laursen is the stronger, more experienced and locally-focused incumbent. She deserves re-election.”
I agree with the Chambers endorsement of Paige Wright, I have listened to her speak and like her solid grounded approach to business. As for Laursen, I attended the school board meeting the other evening and listened to Jon Vranish speak and I would NEVER vote for anyone who served on the board while this mess they have created happened!
No HR department in the business world would have ever let this happen!!
Congrats Paige!
You’re on your way!
Way to go, Paige! They got it Wright!
I am happy with the Wright endorsement, but Laursen? They speak of wanting continuity in the board as reason for endorsing her, but seem to forget that there are 3 other remaining board members that would maintain that… Having attended or watched many of the school board meetings this past year, I can not support either Laursen or Bowser. I was shocked by much of what I heard from both of them. Basing their endorsement decision on the questionnaire only and not watching the incombants in action isn’t using good judgement in my opinion. That should be included as part of their decision making process.
My votes go to MILLER and WRIGHT.
Laursen is the closest thing the Chamber has to a puppet on the School Board. They want to keep her, but the voters don’t have to.
Vote Miller and Wright for a CHANGE in leadership, a BIG change for the better.
I’m voting for Miller and Wright. Time for some change of the School Board.
Congratulations Paige!
Laursen?
I would be interested to know who her friends are on the Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce’s.
Miller get my vote’
Remember, this is the Chamber PAC that endorsed The Hippy Mayor, and her crony Cook-Kallio for City Council. Any entity that endorses candidates like those two loses a lot of credibility.
Like @JeriAnn I have either or attended nearly every board meeting. In my heart, I believe Joan Laursen is a good person, trying hard to do good things. In my brain, i disagree with her on most of the important decisions the Trustees have faced.
A vote for Laursen is a vote to blindly FOLLOW the Superintendent
A vote for Laursen is a vote to cheer on any district move, without challenge
A vote for Laursen is a vote to support “Associations” (UNIONS) on all topics
A vote for Laursen is a vote with JEFF BOWSER and CHRIS GRANT (the absentee trustee)
I cannot vote for those things, no matter how much i think she is a “nice person”. A vote for Laursen is a vote against confrontation, governance, and scrutiny. The Trustees are elected to represent us, the voters. I encourage you to watch Trustee Laursen’s comments at the School Calendar meeting. Her position and statements dismissed the vocal parents (remember… more parents wanted traditional than any other option) and used the “Change is hard” crutch. A leader says “there’s no reason to rush this. Our survey was flawed. We were all shocked that there are in reality only two options and 3 of the survey options weren’t approved by the UNIONS. We owe our parents a re-look at the process”. Laursen was happy to be a puppet for the Superintendent, Trustee Bowser, and the unions.
Wright and Miller lack the school board experience and knowledge that Trustee Laursen has – this is true. At this point, that’s a positive in my mind. I don’t need someone with experience ignoring voters/parents. Laursen’s experience blindly block voting to support the superintendent isn’t an asset. Both Wright and Miller have impressed me with their lack of fear, and desire to scrutinize the behaviors of the board and the administration. Lack of experience can cause someone to say: “Wait – i don’t understand this. Explain it to me.” In my opinion, Trustee Laursen should have been asking that same question instead of RUBBER STAMPING.
If unseated, I do hope Ms. Laursen finds a way to stay involved helping our community. As i stated above, she seems to be a nice person with a good heart and enthusiastic spirit. There are many roles where her gifts (cheerleading, supporting, and networking) are much needed. For School Board we need change agents, great managers (who can manage the superintendent), and pit bulls who are going to listen and voice the opinions of parents.
Paige Wright and Mark Miller get my vote.
Accountability said: “In my heart, I believe Joan Laursen is a good person, trying hard to do good things. In my brain, i disagree with her on most of the important decisions the Trustees have faced.”
I agree wholeheartedly.
It seems that some are choosing laursen because she has some experience, but we must remember there are still 3 sitting board members with experience.
My vote is for Wright and Miller.
I completely agree with Accountability. I am so done with Joan Laursen and Jeff Bowser. They do NOT represent me. They don’t listen to parents. They are arrogant and assume they know better. And the irony is they are PUPPETS. Puppets for an organization that is in deep chaos.
It’s like we are in the midst of the movie, “The Wizard of Oz.” The superintendent could really use a brain. The assistant superintendent of finance is in desperate need of a heart. And the board of trustees could benefit from a little dose of courage.
My hope is that Paige Wright and Mark Miller will listen and take note. A good board member is one who remembers who works for whom. The cabinet needs a deep cleaning. If Paige and Mark win, I know a lot of Pleasanton parents who would happily contribute the cleaning supplies.
I am voting for the children and the best education they can get, therefore Wright and Miller will get our check marks.
Paige Wright, I support you and am confident you will give 100 percent.
@Leslie, I know this isn’t a laughing matter, but you hit the nail on the head. Squarely! A post on another PUSD related blog mentioned the Wizard of Oz, “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”, and yours is also spot on! I can’t stop laughing at how appropriate it is… which makes me feel both sad and guilty.
I really do think a stroll over to the TV-30 “on-demand” Board Meeting playback is a MUST DO for all Pleasanton voters. The tape doesn’t lie. It doesn’t take long to see that our superintendent, though well meaning, is in way over her head. I think “no brain” is a little harsh and an exaggeration but (politely put) she isn’t up to the challenges of running any district. I’ve listened to her speak at graduations and other events, and it’s a bit embarrassing. The tape doesn’t lie, pop some popcorn. Beyond the public speaking skills, it’s clear that her ability to inspire and motivate teachers and administrators has been woefully lacking. I’m sure we’ve all had times where we were just “not good enough” for a situation, and sadly that’s the case with our superintendent.
As for “heart”, the Asst Superintendent comes across as a cold and insensitive bean counter. Personally, I think I’m OK with that. Most CFO and accounting types are painfully inadequate in other areas, but exceptional with the numbers. She has a decent command of material, but her delivery is so condescending and arrogant. It also feels a lot like a shell game, where she can confuse the board long enough to distract them from their own questions. Unless some major coaching can happen (from a new superintendent maybe?) the Asst superintendent should not be managing people or interfacing with parents or teachers. She is universally disliked by teachers that i have discussed this topic with. Let her count beans. Now…the massive contract she was awarded by the Superintendent….that’s another story! Better get more beans….
The board needing courage… I totally agree Leslie! I have watched telecasts where BOWSER/LAURSEN/GRANT line up like little sheep to nod their heads and make statements like “its all about the kids” and “every child deserves a quality education” but never challenging our administration to do better. Everything is SO WONDERFUL. When Trustee Laursen or Hintzke challenge anything they are quickly silenced with bully behaviors from the Team of Yes. It’s an upside down org chart – where right now The unions boss around a weak superintendent, then that weak superintendent (and her hired gun bean counter) bully the teachers and administrators, all while the cowardly lion board sits watching and occasionally saying “thanks everyone for working so hard!”.
Loved the concept, @Leslie, hope you don’t mind me expanding on it. Voters shouldn’t form their ballot decisions based on blogs, though, so PLEASE go watch a few board meetings at http://www.tri-valleytv.org/school.html Use the “on-Demand” menu so you can pick the juicy topics. I recommend watching the public comments for every board meeting, particularly the most recent ones! You won’t be bored…
i am so happy with all the blog posts. pleasanton residents are speaking out against the ridiculous reality that exists in our school district. we deserve better. we have excellent schools because we have excellent parents who value education and demand excellence from their children. we need to protect our school district from the very people who lead it.
@leslie, i love your wizard of oz analogy and @accountability, i love your elaborations, and i agree with you. right now, we are faced with a superintendent who just isn’t cut out for the job and a board who is too afraid to do anything about it.
@joan, jeff, you have had your chance to lead. you have failed. it’s someone else’s turn.
vote wright and miller.
Sorry, Pleasanton does not need a rubber stamp for the superintendent, we need people that represent the kids and families in Pleasanton.
And by the way, what the heck is the Chamber PAC doing getting involved in the school board election? This has nothing to do with local businesses. Focus on your job of building and retaining business and jobs to Pleasanton, not trying to influence a school board elections.
How do we get rid of the superintendent? We need all of the school board members to give her the review she deserves (not a good one in my opinion for all of the fiascos she has caused this year). After that when it’s time to vote on the renewal of her contract she will be asked to leave. Maybe they can terminate her after her negative reviews and pay out the rest of her contract but she definitely needs to go. I completely agree with the other posters that say she is not a good speaker and she is not motivating. I was shocked at some of her graduation and 8th grade promotion speeches. She’s just bad and Laursen and Bowser both keep her going by giving her high marks and extending her contract.
Does anyone know HOW we remove the present superintendent? Do we have to wait until her contract expires? If that is indeed the case, when is that???
I suppose I could write and ask our present board members, but doubt I would get an answer.
Anyone know when she HAS to go?
Anyone know how we could facilitate that departure ahead of the contract date?