JeffCo school board decision draws questions re:transparency

It's frustrating that we are still having to deal with district transparency issues. It's been several years since I testified before a Senate Subcommittee on the need for full view of public school expenses and activities, and thought the Bill had passed (albeit in a watered-down version). Musta missed a(nother) step, huh?

Perhaps you could expand on what "district transparency" issues you are talking about CK. This board hired an attorney that answered to the board, in a public meeting, where before the attorneys answered to the former superintendent and were hired by that person absent any public exposure or discussion in any board meeting. Is this not more transparent than what occurred in the past? We know, from a public meeting of the board, both the name of the legal firm representing the district and the amount of the tax revenue being spent to obtain the services of that firm. Did you know the name of the attorneys that the former super hired to answer to her? Did you know the amount of tax revenue that was spent to pay for their services? Did you know that the attorney the former super hired had submitted a letter of resignation effective before the end of November 2013? Did you know that Stevenson had decided the board didn't require that information in a timely manner?

Seems to me that at least some of the issues regarding "district transparency" are disappearing at the same time the outgoing superintendent is.

Print, it was the actual annual line-item expenses that were supposed to become transparent.

At one time about a decade ago, I became very interested in Denver Public Schools labor-union, HR and pension issues, and eventually sued the district -- the claim was concluded in settlement.

I think it's just awful that these public entities are managed in secret! but my focus was in Denver, not Jeffco, so I don't know if the same shenanigans are tolerated there. But in any event, at one point around 2007 or so, a Bill was introduced whereby all districts' expenses and activities were to be mounted on a public website -- I know the districts complained about the cost of such an endeavor so possibly the Bill was never passed? I'd have to check the Bill history to see, I understood it had been modified during presentation, as you know this is often the case in order to garner enough votes to get a proposal passed.

The legal representation issue you mentioned sounds quite curious, doesn't it? Unless counsel was hired to represent the Superintendent as an individual? If the fee bills were paid with public funds, if I lived in Jeffco I would certainly raise the fact that my taxes paid for counsel, so I'm entitled to know who and for what general purpose the funds were spent.

During testimony on the proposed Bill, some individuals related having been charged mondo funds under Open Records Act requests, by the public entities supplying the information -- actually, that was the gist of the Bill, so that nobody had to make the request in the first place. I don't have to tell you that the districts mounted a strong opposition to the proposed Bill -- since Information supplied often leads to more questions being asked. And, realistically speaking, it would cost X to maintain a website and mount the information upon it for public view....although the Independence Institute, as I recall, had the cost hammered down to a handful of change, and may even have offered to just outright pay for it. lol

ColoradoKathy wrote: I think it's just awful that these public entities are managed in secret!

This is how government as a whole always "works", mostly behind closed doors without the prying eyes and ears of the public or the media.

It's particularly disturbing that "the way it works" is the exact opposite of what the same governmental entity teaches children in its classrooms.

Looks like Cyndi got a CEO style golden parachute per the cover of the Denver Post this morning. 200K for the good doctor to walk away. I doubt I will ever be offered that.

FredHayek wrote: Looks like Cyndi got a CEO style golden parachute per the cover of the Denver Post this morning. 200K for the good doctor to walk away. I doubt I will ever be offered that.

I'm annoying to have around, but not $200K worth of annoying.

Can I be even $200 worth of annoying? Your mama wears army boots.

http://www.boarddocs.com/co/jeffco/Board.nsf/Public#
Special Board of Education Meeting Tonight:

Meeting: Feb 27, 2014 - Special Meeting
Category: Preliminary
Location: Board Room, Education Center
Type: Procedural

5th fl., Board Room, 1829 Denver West Drive, Bldg. 27, Golden, CO

Agenda:
1. Preliminary
1.01 Location: Board Room, Education Center

1.02 Call to Order: 7:00 p.m.

1.03 Roll Call

1.04 Approve Agenda

2. Consent Agenda

2.01 Executive Search Services Agreement: Ray & Associates
[This item has files attached ]

3. Study/Dialogue Session

3.01 Budget Review
[This item has files attached ]

3.02 Community Engagement on 2014-2015 Budget

3.03 Transition Plan

4. Executive Session

4.01 Legal Advice on Teacher Dismissal Process

5. Adjournment