Jump to content



Photo

Melin trying to anger everyone at once?


  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#1 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 10:34 AM

It's been reported Superintendent Andrew Melin has strongly suggested teachers need to get on board with his plan to raise taxes and close neighborhood schools. The administration also paid a consultant $50,000 in taxpayer dollars to advise them on the referendum campaign.

Did Melin not get our money's worth from the consultant, or is he ignoring expensive advice? Pissing off those whose support you want can't be the recommended strategy. Yet, that's what appears to be happening.

Rumor is, Melin has suggested that next year, teachers should work longer each day for the same pay, lol. That should go over like a ton of bricks!

So now we have a request that taxpayers agree to be taxed above the state's constitutional tax caps in order to have their neighborhood schools shuttered coupled with a total diss to our community's teachers.

Uh, no?

Edited by kelley, 01 June 2015 - 10:36 AM.

  • GrumpyGranny, Oldgoat, snowman and 1 other like this

#2 snowman

snowman

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,673 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 12:20 PM

Is there any way to fire Dr. Melin?  He seems pretty wacko.


  • kelley and Donna like this

#3 Sleepy

Sleepy

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,359 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 01:20 PM

He has a 3 year revolving contract.

 

But yes he can be fired.



#4 GrumpyGranny

GrumpyGranny

    Local Legend

  • Administrators
  • 5,169 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 01:58 PM

The question is would the current board fire him or is he doing what they want done? Since nothing has been publicly said by any board members against his big plans (that I am aware of), they must approve...


  • kelley, snowman, Tina and 1 other like this

#5 IntegrityMatters

IntegrityMatters

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,995 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 02:11 PM

At the board meeting where he "announced" his plans to the Board (although they all knew about it already since they had been planning it for over a year!), each board member made a comment after he was finished.   They all seemed to be in favor.  

 

Also, they ALL voted in favor of hiring Klink (the marketing consultant who helped them plan the referendum) in July 2014.  They did so by slipping his hiring through on the Consent Agenda under Personnel -- Other.  This was extremely deceitful in my opinion.   They obviously didn't want the public to know who they were hiring or for what.  They should ALL be ashamed for this.  Transparency does not exist with this Board.


  • GrumpyGranny, Serve, snowman and 2 others like this

#6 CityBoy

CityBoy

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 973 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 02:16 PM

I've lost track.  Is the referendum going to be on the city-wide ballots in November?



#7 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 02:24 PM

I've lost track. Is the referendum going to be on the city-wide ballots in November?


The board still has to approve it in June, but all indications are they will. Then it will be on the ballots of all located within GCCS' boundaries in November. It's important that this information gets out as those living outside a municipality may assume they don't need to go the polls.

Edited by kelley, 01 June 2015 - 02:27 PM.

  • Donna likes this

#8 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 02:29 PM

The question is would the current board fire him or is he doing what they want done? Since nothing has been publicly said by any board members against his big plans (that I am aware of), they must approve...


I've discussed this directly with my board rep, Teresa Perkins, and she has participated in discussion about the referendum on our neighborhood Facebook page. She supports the referendum. If this is the representative of one of the areas most negatively impacted, there's not much hope for the rest of them.
  • GrumpyGranny, Becka Christensen and Donna like this

#9 Donna

Donna

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,465 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 02:40 PM

Very disappointed that the district School Board representative of both Spring Hill and Maple Elementary schools has disregarded her constituents, children and neighborhoods.  She has repeatedly stated that she is "unapologetic." 


  • GrumpyGranny, Serve and toomanytoofew like this

#10 IntegrityMatters

IntegrityMatters

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,995 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 03:01 PM

I am not surprised -- she was also unapologetic over her refusal to resign from the Board after committing a felony.   The state law has now been changed because of her actions and it passed both the House and Senate unanimously.   The law takes effect on July 1 and will automatically remove any school board member who pleads guilty to a felony or is convicted during their term of office.  No longer will the public have to endure the remainder of someone's term while they are on probation.    Unfortunately, Ms. Perkins still refuses to resign and none of her fellow board members are speaking out about this.  It taints the credibility of the entire board in my opinion.   A teacher would have been fired for this -- but a board member feels she is exempt!  Shameful.


  • GrumpyGranny, Becka Christensen, Stinkeymonkey and 2 others like this

#11 Avid Reader

Avid Reader

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 388 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 05:15 PM

We have many friends and neighbors in education. We have been told by our friends who work for GCCS that, in their opinions, they are being pressured to speak in favor of the referendum. They are in fear of speaking out against it, joining the facebook group or even being in a group where the referendum is being questioned. I strongly believe that this is just plain wrong.


  • IntegrityMatters, GrumpyGranny, kelley and 3 others like this

#12 CityBoy

CityBoy

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 973 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 05:33 PM

Word in Charlestown is that the Pleasant Ridge teachers have been urged to support the plan, and were told that they are the best teachers in C'town schools, so they will be assigned to the new school.



#13 Donna

Donna

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,465 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 06:01 PM

Yeah, Dr. Melin keeps throwing that canard out.  "The teachers will follow the students" in these closings/consolidations.  Unless, those teachers publicly make a stand.  Then, I'm willing to bet they will be fired due to "philosophical differences." 

 

I've spoken to quite a few teachers, and so far, none of them are for these closures.  They acknowledge that this will hit the kids and parents hardest and limit teacher's outreach to students who struggle.  However, they cannot state this publicly and expect to stay employed at GCCS.


  • IntegrityMatters, GrumpyGranny, kelley and 3 others like this

#14 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 07:36 PM

I see why Melin want teachers (to at least pretend to be) on board! They have power.

I waited too long to post about the proposal for increased hours. It was announced to union members today that the proposal has been abandoned.

Go teachers!

Now for more grassroots success!
  • IntegrityMatters, snowman, Donna and 1 other like this

#15 CaptainPicard

CaptainPicard

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 776 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 08:13 PM


Rumor is, Melin has suggested that next year, teachers should work longer each day for the same pay, lol. That should go over like a ton of bricks!
 

 

This is not a rumor, this is fact.  Write it down.  No contract=no recourse.



#16 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 08:18 PM

This is not a rumor, this is fact. Write it down. No contract=no recourse.


They must have had some recourse - or leverage - because he reversed course.
  • Donna likes this

#17 IntegrityMatters

IntegrityMatters

    Key Club

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,995 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 08:37 PM

Maybe it was all a ploy to get teachers upset --- then give in to them -- and thereby hope they will get on board with his ridiculous referendum!  :shifty:


  • GrumpyGranny likes this

#18 CaptainPicard

CaptainPicard

    Councilman

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 776 posts

Posted 02 June 2015 - 11:54 AM

They must have had some recourse - or leverage - because he reversed course.

 

Easy to say now.  I will believe it when I see it next school year.



#19 kelley

kelley

    Local Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,126 posts

Posted 02 June 2015 - 02:26 PM

Fair point.

The union was calling for a demonstration before tonight's board meeting, so, as I understand it, the matter was removed from the agenda. Probably doesn't prevent him from bringing it up again when he thinks the timing is more favorable.

#20 Sleepy

Sleepy

    Commissioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,359 posts

Posted 02 June 2015 - 02:47 PM

Extra time.....I thought this had to be in the bargaining unit.  In contract..






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users