Stakeholders for Transparency supports Holly Tillman for the CVCHS School Board. Here is her synopsis of Wednesday’s (11/12/14) board meeting:
Friends, here is why I am running for the CVCHS board and why I need your support. Last night I witnessed the most toxic meeting I’ve attended since May, and a friend asked me if I thought the meeting went well last night. Here is a brief synopsis of what transpired during those three painful hours and why my head is still throbbing today.
Do I think it went well? That depends on which part.
• If you mean, when the board allowed Mr. Linzey to give a 10+ minute speech on how he has been wronged and then didn’t allow anyone in the audience to respond because the speech was non-agendized. NO.
• If you mean watching the teachers hand in a letter of a vote of no confidence against Mr. Linzey and 27 out of the 40 permanent teachers signed it. HELL YES!
• If you mean listening to the attorney provide a recommendation that all staff board members recuse themselves during salary/hiring discussions and voting. NO
• If you mean watching the 4 board members remaining in the room approve a four-year contract for Mr. Linzey’s $204,000 salary for 215 days of work, and a $350 car allowance plus other perks after just hearing there is a vote of no confidence against Linzey. NO. All in, his salary will come in just under $248,000.
• If you mean having a vile man in the audience stand up there for 3 minutes and berate the teachers who choose to speak up by saying they were essentially lazy and can’t get the job done, they have sour grapes, are washed up and they need to move on. NO.
• If you mean having to listen to Ted Meriam explain the rationale on why he is and will be voting for himself to remain on the board when the audience and board members asked him to recuse himself, and he refused to do so. NO.
• If you mean having a board member ask the attorney his advice on whether or not board members running for appointed positions should recuse themselves from voting for themselves, and hearing the attorney say he doesn’t provide recommendations. HELL NO (SEE BULLET #3 ABOVE)!
• If you mean how did my interview go despite all of the above. I ROCKED IT!
• If you mean watching the blatant disregard for other candidates trying to speak out to let the board know that they were misled when the election chairperson told them they must choose only one position when there are clearly two separate elections taking place. NO.
• If you mean hearing from a parent who volunteered her time to serve on the election committee explain how she was ignored, disrespected, and excluded from making those decisions which ultimately led to some candidates being misled about the election process, and that all the while the chair of the election committee consulted on the process with a Board member who was up for reappointment? NO.
I want to help change this one-sided culture and make sure that all sides of every issue are heard. I appreciate that there are always two or more sides to every issue. But the only way to get to the truth is to include everyone in the discussion! So now, more than ever, I need you to let the Board know that you support my vision–especially because the board member I am running against is allowed to vote for himself!
As I said during my interview, I am uniquely qualified to serve on the board because I am not only a community member, but I am a future CVCHS parent and a former teacher as well, and could be a liaison between the teachers, the board and the administration to collaborate on how to fix the rift currently on campus.
Thank you again for all of your support! Unfortunately the community does not get to vote, but you can show support by directly emailing the board and letting them know why you’d like me to be appointed to the Community-Member-At-Large position. Email_board@claytonvalley.org is the email address to send in your letter.
Follow up to my post per Bridget: Technically, I’m sure some will disagree with Holly’s statement that people were not “allowed” to respond to Mr. Linzey’s comments. Yes, there is an open forum comment section. HOWEVER, the Board requires all speakers to turn in an open forum comment card prior to the meeting. Since no one was aware that Mr. Linzey’s statement would be made, how could anyone have planned ahead and filled out a comment card? And even if someone had the foresight to fill out the comment card and speak during open forum, speakers are given only 3 minutes before the microphone is shut off. So how could you respond to a 10-minute plus prepared speech with only 3 minutes and no preparation? I, as an audience member new to these meetings, would like to have heard both sides in order to make an educated decision on whether Mr. Linzey has been the subject of unfounded “mudslinging” and that “there are no facts” to support the claim that he is “anti-teacher.”