In pursuit of equal time from the school board, the parents involved with the group Davis OPEN requesting and received 25 minutes from the school board at the March 15, 2007 meeting. That twenty five minutes became over an hour, however, not before the Task Force received another hour of time to respond to questions from the school board. But that is fine–the parents got a full opportunity from the school board to respond to the report by the Task Force. That was more than generous from the board.
Four members of the Davis OPEN group Baki Tezcan, Fred Buderi, Rick Gonzales, and Collen Connolly spoke at length to counter the findings by the Task Force.
The Davis Enterprise article by Jeff Hudson made not one single mention of this presentation in the article that they ran last night. Not one single mention.
The public relies on a newspaper to provide a balanced account of the events that take place at public meetings. The vast majority of the public neither attend these meetings nor do they watch the proceedings on television. This bestows great responsibility on the media to be the public watch dog. When the media however fails in their responsibilities to the public, through lack of balanced coverage, democracy itself is threatened.
There can be no equal time if the local newspaper does not cover events in a fair and unbiased manner. These concerns about the Davis Enterprise coverage led me to create this blog as a means to cover what the Enterprise itself will not cover.
The People’s Vanguard of Davis does not attempt to replicate the work of the local evening paper. Instead of merely covering events, we cover aspects of events that the local paper can’t or won’t. There have been times when the Enterprise has done a reasonable job of covering events, that we have merely focused on different aspects of the events–angles that people might not normally get by merely reading the Enterprise.
There have also been times when this blog has been criticized by some because we have been too critical of the local paper. That said, this complete lack of even a mention is among the most blatant examples of biased and faulty coverage by the Enterprise. This is inexcusable. This is an insult to the efforts of dedicated citizens in this community who spent a tremendous amount of time and energy to prepare a report and for it not to even get mentioned is unbelievable.
How can the public know about the fact that task force’s findings have been challenged if the local newspaper does not print it? For 99 percent of the citizens in the community–that presentation might as well have not happened.
While we have been critical of the Enterprise’s coverage in the past, this omission may very well be the worst and most blatant. It is as if there was no presentation by Davis OPEN. There was no mention about several of the findings by the Task Force being contradicted and at times nullified by further information. This would have been crucial information for the public. Throw out all of the information to the public and let the public decide what is credible and what is not credible.
What was covered in the paper? The first half of the article was the board exchange that took at most five to ten minutes where they were deciding how to proceed in terms of the next meeting and whether any action should be taken or could be taken now on making a decision to forestall a decision until the fall. Then there was discussion of the interim budget, a small discussion of Kirk Trost’s statement, and then a few members of the public.
This lack of coverage is mind-boggling. As our article discussed yesterday, there was a key discussion that indicated that closing Valley Oak would in fact negatively impact students and parents in terms of distance from school and ability to walk to school–which would lead to transportation problems.
The Davis OPEN members spent a good deal of time talking about budget projections and the EL program among other things. These things were in direct contradiction to the Task Force’s report.
There were some who openly questioned the district as to why they were paying for two superintendents, but those people apparently did not realize how much money the past superintendent had cost the school district, to the point that paying him not to work may have been more cost effective.
But the bottom line here is an issue of fairness, it is an issue of balance, and it is a frustration that the hard work of people is not getting reported. The public is not getting the full picture here. They have heard EXTENSIVELY about the Task Force’s point of view–there have been MULTIPLE articles that have covered the Task Force and their arguments.
At this meeting, the parents and community members directly involved in this issue were given a chance to respond. To make their case before the board. This should have been THE story in the Enterprise. It could have at least been mentioned in the Enterprise. But it was not. There was not one single word even mentioning the presentation. The public as a whole has no idea that such a presentation was made or that the Task Force’s findings were in question. How can they make an informed decision? How can the newspaper in good conscience claim to be serving the public’s needs with such a blatant failure?
For those who would like to see the presentation by Davis OPEN please click here: http://davisopen.org/id16.html
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Pleading for fairness in reporting falls on deaf ears with the Enterprise. Anonymous’ posting Thursday that such unfairness begin to cost the Enterprise advertising revenue unfortunately appears be the only alternative.
Pleading for fairness in reporting falls on deaf ears with the Enterprise. Anonymous’ posting Thursday that such unfairness begin to cost the Enterprise advertising revenue unfortunately appears be the only alternative.
Pleading for fairness in reporting falls on deaf ears with the Enterprise. Anonymous’ posting Thursday that such unfairness begin to cost the Enterprise advertising revenue unfortunately appears be the only alternative.
Pleading for fairness in reporting falls on deaf ears with the Enterprise. Anonymous’ posting Thursday that such unfairness begin to cost the Enterprise advertising revenue unfortunately appears be the only alternative.
OPEN’s challenge to the Task Forces’s “recommendation” and the School Board
majority’s interest in taking the time necessary for the full analysis
and board reflection that the VO closure issue deserves appeared to generate a level of anger and impatience in Ms. Jones and Mr. Trost that was both revealing and disturbing.
OPEN’s challenge to the Task Forces’s “recommendation” and the School Board
majority’s interest in taking the time necessary for the full analysis
and board reflection that the VO closure issue deserves appeared to generate a level of anger and impatience in Ms. Jones and Mr. Trost that was both revealing and disturbing.
OPEN’s challenge to the Task Forces’s “recommendation” and the School Board
majority’s interest in taking the time necessary for the full analysis
and board reflection that the VO closure issue deserves appeared to generate a level of anger and impatience in Ms. Jones and Mr. Trost that was both revealing and disturbing.
OPEN’s challenge to the Task Forces’s “recommendation” and the School Board
majority’s interest in taking the time necessary for the full analysis
and board reflection that the VO closure issue deserves appeared to generate a level of anger and impatience in Ms. Jones and Mr. Trost that was both revealing and disturbing.
Yeah… that’s how we felt with Measure K/Target. Doesn’t make me happy that they do it to everyone but it doesn’t make me feel special either.
Yeah… that’s how we felt with Measure K/Target. Doesn’t make me happy that they do it to everyone but it doesn’t make me feel special either.
Yeah… that’s how we felt with Measure K/Target. Doesn’t make me happy that they do it to everyone but it doesn’t make me feel special either.
Yeah… that’s how we felt with Measure K/Target. Doesn’t make me happy that they do it to everyone but it doesn’t make me feel special either.
How can the board make an informed decision before the enrollment figures and inter district transfer applications for 2007-2008 have been tallied? Those numbers won’t be ready until the coming school year. (There are always late enrollees who’ve moved to town to start at the university in late Sept.)
Last year’s enrollment projections proved wrong by 100 students. The numbers didn’t fall by 100, but stabilized. Each of those 100 surprise enrollees brought $5528 in state funds. 2007-2008 state funds will reflect this approx. $550,000 increase in funding.
There is no budget crisis/deficit NOW. IF it occurs in 2009-2010, take appropriate steps then. Don’t take the draconian step of closing a neighborhood school based on demographic projections that have already been proved wrong.
Colleen Connolly
How can the board make an informed decision before the enrollment figures and inter district transfer applications for 2007-2008 have been tallied? Those numbers won’t be ready until the coming school year. (There are always late enrollees who’ve moved to town to start at the university in late Sept.)
Last year’s enrollment projections proved wrong by 100 students. The numbers didn’t fall by 100, but stabilized. Each of those 100 surprise enrollees brought $5528 in state funds. 2007-2008 state funds will reflect this approx. $550,000 increase in funding.
There is no budget crisis/deficit NOW. IF it occurs in 2009-2010, take appropriate steps then. Don’t take the draconian step of closing a neighborhood school based on demographic projections that have already been proved wrong.
Colleen Connolly
How can the board make an informed decision before the enrollment figures and inter district transfer applications for 2007-2008 have been tallied? Those numbers won’t be ready until the coming school year. (There are always late enrollees who’ve moved to town to start at the university in late Sept.)
Last year’s enrollment projections proved wrong by 100 students. The numbers didn’t fall by 100, but stabilized. Each of those 100 surprise enrollees brought $5528 in state funds. 2007-2008 state funds will reflect this approx. $550,000 increase in funding.
There is no budget crisis/deficit NOW. IF it occurs in 2009-2010, take appropriate steps then. Don’t take the draconian step of closing a neighborhood school based on demographic projections that have already been proved wrong.
Colleen Connolly
How can the board make an informed decision before the enrollment figures and inter district transfer applications for 2007-2008 have been tallied? Those numbers won’t be ready until the coming school year. (There are always late enrollees who’ve moved to town to start at the university in late Sept.)
Last year’s enrollment projections proved wrong by 100 students. The numbers didn’t fall by 100, but stabilized. Each of those 100 surprise enrollees brought $5528 in state funds. 2007-2008 state funds will reflect this approx. $550,000 increase in funding.
There is no budget crisis/deficit NOW. IF it occurs in 2009-2010, take appropriate steps then. Don’t take the draconian step of closing a neighborhood school based on demographic projections that have already been proved wrong.
Colleen Connolly
“Anonymous’ posting Thursday that such unfairness begin to cost the Enterprise advertising revenue unfortunately appears be the only alternative.”
Write a letter.
Submit an op-ed.
Email the editor.
Contact Jeff Hudson.
All of those are better alternatives than proposing an advertising boycott. Boycotts, rallies, protests, and demonstrations are all far less effective than reasoned discourse.
“Anonymous’ posting Thursday that such unfairness begin to cost the Enterprise advertising revenue unfortunately appears be the only alternative.”
Write a letter.
Submit an op-ed.
Email the editor.
Contact Jeff Hudson.
All of those are better alternatives than proposing an advertising boycott. Boycotts, rallies, protests, and demonstrations are all far less effective than reasoned discourse.
“Anonymous’ posting Thursday that such unfairness begin to cost the Enterprise advertising revenue unfortunately appears be the only alternative.”
Write a letter.
Submit an op-ed.
Email the editor.
Contact Jeff Hudson.
All of those are better alternatives than proposing an advertising boycott. Boycotts, rallies, protests, and demonstrations are all far less effective than reasoned discourse.
“Anonymous’ posting Thursday that such unfairness begin to cost the Enterprise advertising revenue unfortunately appears be the only alternative.”
Write a letter.
Submit an op-ed.
Email the editor.
Contact Jeff Hudson.
All of those are better alternatives than proposing an advertising boycott. Boycotts, rallies, protests, and demonstrations are all far less effective than reasoned discourse.
“The Davis Enterprise article by Jeff Hudson made not one single mention of this presentation in the article that they ran last night. Not one single mention.”
Not one single mention?
I read this in Hudson’s story:
“The meat of the meeting came after 11 p.m., after the board heard a lengthy presentation from Valley Oak supporters urging that the school be kept open.”
In addition to that, the sub-headline said, “School board hears pleas from parents …” And the large page A1 photo featured Valley Oak supporters speaking to the school board.
It is true that this particular story did not give details of the arguments made by Davis OPEN. (Equally, it did not give details of the views of the Task Force.) However, there have been quite a large number of letters published recently which have aired those views in The Enterprise, as well as a lengthy op/ed piece in last Sunday’s paper written by the leaders of Davis OPEN.
So to suggest that their views have been ignored is wrong.
Rightly or wrongly, Jeff Hudson focused this article on the “structural deficit” of the district, and how that affects the decision to keep VO open or closed. He extensively quoted every elected member of the board.
If I have a criticism of this article, it’s that his definition of a structural deficit — “when an agency consistently spends more money than it takes in” — is inadequate. He’s simply describing a series of deficit spending. Instead, a structural deficit should be defined thusly: when an institution’s long-term, committed expenses exceed its long-term projected revenue stream.
An agency could have a deficit 10 years in a row, and that would not necessarily be a “structural” deficit. Why not? Because it might have the ability, each year, to reduce its uncommitted, marginal expenses enough to reach a balanced budget. With a true structural deficit, that cannot be achieved. To fix such a problem, revenue streams have to be increased, or its long-term expenses — such as its commitments to its labor force or its administrative costs — must be reduced.
If the DJUSD truly does have a structural deficit — and it might, if the school aged population is declining — then fixing that should be the board’s first priority. (As I’ve said on this blog before, I think reducing the administrative expenses at the school level would be the best first step at solving the problem.)
“The Davis Enterprise article by Jeff Hudson made not one single mention of this presentation in the article that they ran last night. Not one single mention.”
Not one single mention?
I read this in Hudson’s story:
“The meat of the meeting came after 11 p.m., after the board heard a lengthy presentation from Valley Oak supporters urging that the school be kept open.”
In addition to that, the sub-headline said, “School board hears pleas from parents …” And the large page A1 photo featured Valley Oak supporters speaking to the school board.
It is true that this particular story did not give details of the arguments made by Davis OPEN. (Equally, it did not give details of the views of the Task Force.) However, there have been quite a large number of letters published recently which have aired those views in The Enterprise, as well as a lengthy op/ed piece in last Sunday’s paper written by the leaders of Davis OPEN.
So to suggest that their views have been ignored is wrong.
Rightly or wrongly, Jeff Hudson focused this article on the “structural deficit” of the district, and how that affects the decision to keep VO open or closed. He extensively quoted every elected member of the board.
If I have a criticism of this article, it’s that his definition of a structural deficit — “when an agency consistently spends more money than it takes in” — is inadequate. He’s simply describing a series of deficit spending. Instead, a structural deficit should be defined thusly: when an institution’s long-term, committed expenses exceed its long-term projected revenue stream.
An agency could have a deficit 10 years in a row, and that would not necessarily be a “structural” deficit. Why not? Because it might have the ability, each year, to reduce its uncommitted, marginal expenses enough to reach a balanced budget. With a true structural deficit, that cannot be achieved. To fix such a problem, revenue streams have to be increased, or its long-term expenses — such as its commitments to its labor force or its administrative costs — must be reduced.
If the DJUSD truly does have a structural deficit — and it might, if the school aged population is declining — then fixing that should be the board’s first priority. (As I’ve said on this blog before, I think reducing the administrative expenses at the school level would be the best first step at solving the problem.)
“The Davis Enterprise article by Jeff Hudson made not one single mention of this presentation in the article that they ran last night. Not one single mention.”
Not one single mention?
I read this in Hudson’s story:
“The meat of the meeting came after 11 p.m., after the board heard a lengthy presentation from Valley Oak supporters urging that the school be kept open.”
In addition to that, the sub-headline said, “School board hears pleas from parents …” And the large page A1 photo featured Valley Oak supporters speaking to the school board.
It is true that this particular story did not give details of the arguments made by Davis OPEN. (Equally, it did not give details of the views of the Task Force.) However, there have been quite a large number of letters published recently which have aired those views in The Enterprise, as well as a lengthy op/ed piece in last Sunday’s paper written by the leaders of Davis OPEN.
So to suggest that their views have been ignored is wrong.
Rightly or wrongly, Jeff Hudson focused this article on the “structural deficit” of the district, and how that affects the decision to keep VO open or closed. He extensively quoted every elected member of the board.
If I have a criticism of this article, it’s that his definition of a structural deficit — “when an agency consistently spends more money than it takes in” — is inadequate. He’s simply describing a series of deficit spending. Instead, a structural deficit should be defined thusly: when an institution’s long-term, committed expenses exceed its long-term projected revenue stream.
An agency could have a deficit 10 years in a row, and that would not necessarily be a “structural” deficit. Why not? Because it might have the ability, each year, to reduce its uncommitted, marginal expenses enough to reach a balanced budget. With a true structural deficit, that cannot be achieved. To fix such a problem, revenue streams have to be increased, or its long-term expenses — such as its commitments to its labor force or its administrative costs — must be reduced.
If the DJUSD truly does have a structural deficit — and it might, if the school aged population is declining — then fixing that should be the board’s first priority. (As I’ve said on this blog before, I think reducing the administrative expenses at the school level would be the best first step at solving the problem.)
“The Davis Enterprise article by Jeff Hudson made not one single mention of this presentation in the article that they ran last night. Not one single mention.”
Not one single mention?
I read this in Hudson’s story:
“The meat of the meeting came after 11 p.m., after the board heard a lengthy presentation from Valley Oak supporters urging that the school be kept open.”
In addition to that, the sub-headline said, “School board hears pleas from parents …” And the large page A1 photo featured Valley Oak supporters speaking to the school board.
It is true that this particular story did not give details of the arguments made by Davis OPEN. (Equally, it did not give details of the views of the Task Force.) However, there have been quite a large number of letters published recently which have aired those views in The Enterprise, as well as a lengthy op/ed piece in last Sunday’s paper written by the leaders of Davis OPEN.
So to suggest that their views have been ignored is wrong.
Rightly or wrongly, Jeff Hudson focused this article on the “structural deficit” of the district, and how that affects the decision to keep VO open or closed. He extensively quoted every elected member of the board.
If I have a criticism of this article, it’s that his definition of a structural deficit — “when an agency consistently spends more money than it takes in” — is inadequate. He’s simply describing a series of deficit spending. Instead, a structural deficit should be defined thusly: when an institution’s long-term, committed expenses exceed its long-term projected revenue stream.
An agency could have a deficit 10 years in a row, and that would not necessarily be a “structural” deficit. Why not? Because it might have the ability, each year, to reduce its uncommitted, marginal expenses enough to reach a balanced budget. With a true structural deficit, that cannot be achieved. To fix such a problem, revenue streams have to be increased, or its long-term expenses — such as its commitments to its labor force or its administrative costs — must be reduced.
If the DJUSD truly does have a structural deficit — and it might, if the school aged population is declining — then fixing that should be the board’s first priority. (As I’ve said on this blog before, I think reducing the administrative expenses at the school level would be the best first step at solving the problem.)
I think the point was that they did not give any details about the presentation. Mentioning that there is a presentation is not reporting on it. Just as telling isn’t selling.
Moreover, they did give details of the Task Force’s presentation after the March 1 meeting.
I think the point was that they did not give any details about the presentation. Mentioning that there is a presentation is not reporting on it. Just as telling isn’t selling.
Moreover, they did give details of the Task Force’s presentation after the March 1 meeting.
I think the point was that they did not give any details about the presentation. Mentioning that there is a presentation is not reporting on it. Just as telling isn’t selling.
Moreover, they did give details of the Task Force’s presentation after the March 1 meeting.
I think the point was that they did not give any details about the presentation. Mentioning that there is a presentation is not reporting on it. Just as telling isn’t selling.
Moreover, they did give details of the Task Force’s presentation after the March 1 meeting.
“However, there have been quite a large number of letters published recently which have aired those views in The Enterprise, as well as a lengthy op/ed piece in last Sunday’s paper written by the leaders of Davis OPEN.”
It’s Hudson job to report what happened and he did an inadequate job of doing that. Greenwald did a much better job of doing that. Greenwald has every right to complain.
“However, there have been quite a large number of letters published recently which have aired those views in The Enterprise, as well as a lengthy op/ed piece in last Sunday’s paper written by the leaders of Davis OPEN.”
It’s Hudson job to report what happened and he did an inadequate job of doing that. Greenwald did a much better job of doing that. Greenwald has every right to complain.
“However, there have been quite a large number of letters published recently which have aired those views in The Enterprise, as well as a lengthy op/ed piece in last Sunday’s paper written by the leaders of Davis OPEN.”
It’s Hudson job to report what happened and he did an inadequate job of doing that. Greenwald did a much better job of doing that. Greenwald has every right to complain.
“However, there have been quite a large number of letters published recently which have aired those views in The Enterprise, as well as a lengthy op/ed piece in last Sunday’s paper written by the leaders of Davis OPEN.”
It’s Hudson job to report what happened and he did an inadequate job of doing that. Greenwald did a much better job of doing that. Greenwald has every right to complain.
Don.. your suggestions do not address the issue .. Should the only newspaper in Davis REPORT the local news in a full and balanced fashion to inform its readership? The Enterprise has received letters to the editor for as long as I can remember(25+years)and it has not made a wit of difference. A year and a half ago, the Enterprise offered a full and balanced 3-part series during the Measure X-Covell Village campaign. The balanced presentation of the issues to the Davis voters was a quite unique Enterprise effort and the overwhelming rejection of Measure X by the voters looks like it may have spelled the death-nell for this kind of Enterprise balanced coverage being repeated.
Don.. your suggestions do not address the issue .. Should the only newspaper in Davis REPORT the local news in a full and balanced fashion to inform its readership? The Enterprise has received letters to the editor for as long as I can remember(25+years)and it has not made a wit of difference. A year and a half ago, the Enterprise offered a full and balanced 3-part series during the Measure X-Covell Village campaign. The balanced presentation of the issues to the Davis voters was a quite unique Enterprise effort and the overwhelming rejection of Measure X by the voters looks like it may have spelled the death-nell for this kind of Enterprise balanced coverage being repeated.
Don.. your suggestions do not address the issue .. Should the only newspaper in Davis REPORT the local news in a full and balanced fashion to inform its readership? The Enterprise has received letters to the editor for as long as I can remember(25+years)and it has not made a wit of difference. A year and a half ago, the Enterprise offered a full and balanced 3-part series during the Measure X-Covell Village campaign. The balanced presentation of the issues to the Davis voters was a quite unique Enterprise effort and the overwhelming rejection of Measure X by the voters looks like it may have spelled the death-nell for this kind of Enterprise balanced coverage being repeated.
Don.. your suggestions do not address the issue .. Should the only newspaper in Davis REPORT the local news in a full and balanced fashion to inform its readership? The Enterprise has received letters to the editor for as long as I can remember(25+years)and it has not made a wit of difference. A year and a half ago, the Enterprise offered a full and balanced 3-part series during the Measure X-Covell Village campaign. The balanced presentation of the issues to the Davis voters was a quite unique Enterprise effort and the overwhelming rejection of Measure X by the voters looks like it may have spelled the death-nell for this kind of Enterprise balanced coverage being repeated.
What else is interesting is that politicians who came out against Measure X were effectively blacklisted by the Enterprise After doing so.
What else is interesting is that politicians who came out against Measure X were effectively blacklisted by the Enterprise After doing so.
What else is interesting is that politicians who came out against Measure X were effectively blacklisted by the Enterprise After doing so.
What else is interesting is that politicians who came out against Measure X were effectively blacklisted by the Enterprise After doing so.
Carmen.. The problem lies squarely on the desk of the Enterprise editor, Debbie Davis, not with the reporters who learn very quickly about the need of self-censorship for career advancement.
Carmen.. The problem lies squarely on the desk of the Enterprise editor, Debbie Davis, not with the reporters who learn very quickly about the need of self-censorship for career advancement.
Carmen.. The problem lies squarely on the desk of the Enterprise editor, Debbie Davis, not with the reporters who learn very quickly about the need of self-censorship for career advancement.
Carmen.. The problem lies squarely on the desk of the Enterprise editor, Debbie Davis, not with the reporters who learn very quickly about the need of self-censorship for career advancement.
“All of those are better alternatives than proposing an advertising boycott. Boycotts, rallies, protests, and demonstrations are all far less effective than reasoned discourse.”
MONEY TALKS!
“All of those are better alternatives than proposing an advertising boycott. Boycotts, rallies, protests, and demonstrations are all far less effective than reasoned discourse.”
MONEY TALKS!
“All of those are better alternatives than proposing an advertising boycott. Boycotts, rallies, protests, and demonstrations are all far less effective than reasoned discourse.”
MONEY TALKS!
“All of those are better alternatives than proposing an advertising boycott. Boycotts, rallies, protests, and demonstrations are all far less effective than reasoned discourse.”
MONEY TALKS!
Hey, hey, hey! Stop the presses!Let’s not be hasty about Mr. Hudson. He has been very generous with his coverage of our position in past and so I did some checking.(…inside info, un-named sources, highly placed…eh, you all get the idea…)
Mr. Hudson was given thirty inches of print space by the newspaper and specifically told to only report on what the board said. This was not his call.
Betcha there’ll be something bigger and better balanced in the Sunday paper.
Colleen Connolly
Hey, hey, hey! Stop the presses!Let’s not be hasty about Mr. Hudson. He has been very generous with his coverage of our position in past and so I did some checking.(…inside info, un-named sources, highly placed…eh, you all get the idea…)
Mr. Hudson was given thirty inches of print space by the newspaper and specifically told to only report on what the board said. This was not his call.
Betcha there’ll be something bigger and better balanced in the Sunday paper.
Colleen Connolly
Hey, hey, hey! Stop the presses!Let’s not be hasty about Mr. Hudson. He has been very generous with his coverage of our position in past and so I did some checking.(…inside info, un-named sources, highly placed…eh, you all get the idea…)
Mr. Hudson was given thirty inches of print space by the newspaper and specifically told to only report on what the board said. This was not his call.
Betcha there’ll be something bigger and better balanced in the Sunday paper.
Colleen Connolly
Hey, hey, hey! Stop the presses!Let’s not be hasty about Mr. Hudson. He has been very generous with his coverage of our position in past and so I did some checking.(…inside info, un-named sources, highly placed…eh, you all get the idea…)
Mr. Hudson was given thirty inches of print space by the newspaper and specifically told to only report on what the board said. This was not his call.
Betcha there’ll be something bigger and better balanced in the Sunday paper.
Colleen Connolly
“specifically told to only report on what the board said”
Debbie Davis?
“specifically told to only report on what the board said”
Debbie Davis?
“specifically told to only report on what the board said”
Debbie Davis?
“specifically told to only report on what the board said”
Debbie Davis?
let’s not jump to conclusions. Ms. Davis has been very supportive of Davis-OPEN. We’ve has two 900 word op-eds and many letters to the editor. Let’s see what the Sunday Enterprise holds.
let’s not jump to conclusions. Ms. Davis has been very supportive of Davis-OPEN. We’ve has two 900 word op-eds and many letters to the editor. Let’s see what the Sunday Enterprise holds.
let’s not jump to conclusions. Ms. Davis has been very supportive of Davis-OPEN. We’ve has two 900 word op-eds and many letters to the editor. Let’s see what the Sunday Enterprise holds.
let’s not jump to conclusions. Ms. Davis has been very supportive of Davis-OPEN. We’ve has two 900 word op-eds and many letters to the editor. Let’s see what the Sunday Enterprise holds.
Coleen.. Op-ed pieces and letters to the editor are essentially editorial pieces. They do not have the “weight” that a news story in a good newspaper carries where there is a presumption that the reporter has done a diligent job of fact-finding and is attempting to offer a balanced article to fully inform their readers.
Coleen.. Op-ed pieces and letters to the editor are essentially editorial pieces. They do not have the “weight” that a news story in a good newspaper carries where there is a presumption that the reporter has done a diligent job of fact-finding and is attempting to offer a balanced article to fully inform their readers.
Coleen.. Op-ed pieces and letters to the editor are essentially editorial pieces. They do not have the “weight” that a news story in a good newspaper carries where there is a presumption that the reporter has done a diligent job of fact-finding and is attempting to offer a balanced article to fully inform their readers.
Coleen.. Op-ed pieces and letters to the editor are essentially editorial pieces. They do not have the “weight” that a news story in a good newspaper carries where there is a presumption that the reporter has done a diligent job of fact-finding and is attempting to offer a balanced article to fully inform their readers.
I agree with Colleen that focus on the school closure issue is most important. I am hopeful that tomorrow’s paper will contain more coverage of the issue.
I appreciate Rick’s discussion of deficits. I sat through the Board’s budget discussion after the Valley Oak closure issue. It was confusing (not by any fault of the staff, but there were lots of numbers, lots of questions, lots of information that can be interpreted different ways, and it was very late, and everyone was tired) and the Board asked many questions. Things I heard included (based on my notes),
– funds had been identified to cover deficits for the next two years;
– there is no “on-going” deficit at this time;
– there wouldn’t be a structural deficit unless we decided to incur some other regular expenditures not currently planned;
– our reserves are small so would have to keep expenses on currently unplanned items;
Some of what I thought I heard doesn’t match up with what others heard. There should be much more careful discussion by the Board regarding exactly what cost reduction really happens from a school closure, why this is the only cost cutting method we’ve looked at so far, and it should be done in a way that gives all of us time to understand it before a decision as drastic as school closure is implemented.
I agree with Colleen that focus on the school closure issue is most important. I am hopeful that tomorrow’s paper will contain more coverage of the issue.
I appreciate Rick’s discussion of deficits. I sat through the Board’s budget discussion after the Valley Oak closure issue. It was confusing (not by any fault of the staff, but there were lots of numbers, lots of questions, lots of information that can be interpreted different ways, and it was very late, and everyone was tired) and the Board asked many questions. Things I heard included (based on my notes),
– funds had been identified to cover deficits for the next two years;
– there is no “on-going” deficit at this time;
– there wouldn’t be a structural deficit unless we decided to incur some other regular expenditures not currently planned;
– our reserves are small so would have to keep expenses on currently unplanned items;
Some of what I thought I heard doesn’t match up with what others heard. There should be much more careful discussion by the Board regarding exactly what cost reduction really happens from a school closure, why this is the only cost cutting method we’ve looked at so far, and it should be done in a way that gives all of us time to understand it before a decision as drastic as school closure is implemented.
I agree with Colleen that focus on the school closure issue is most important. I am hopeful that tomorrow’s paper will contain more coverage of the issue.
I appreciate Rick’s discussion of deficits. I sat through the Board’s budget discussion after the Valley Oak closure issue. It was confusing (not by any fault of the staff, but there were lots of numbers, lots of questions, lots of information that can be interpreted different ways, and it was very late, and everyone was tired) and the Board asked many questions. Things I heard included (based on my notes),
– funds had been identified to cover deficits for the next two years;
– there is no “on-going” deficit at this time;
– there wouldn’t be a structural deficit unless we decided to incur some other regular expenditures not currently planned;
– our reserves are small so would have to keep expenses on currently unplanned items;
Some of what I thought I heard doesn’t match up with what others heard. There should be much more careful discussion by the Board regarding exactly what cost reduction really happens from a school closure, why this is the only cost cutting method we’ve looked at so far, and it should be done in a way that gives all of us time to understand it before a decision as drastic as school closure is implemented.
I agree with Colleen that focus on the school closure issue is most important. I am hopeful that tomorrow’s paper will contain more coverage of the issue.
I appreciate Rick’s discussion of deficits. I sat through the Board’s budget discussion after the Valley Oak closure issue. It was confusing (not by any fault of the staff, but there were lots of numbers, lots of questions, lots of information that can be interpreted different ways, and it was very late, and everyone was tired) and the Board asked many questions. Things I heard included (based on my notes),
– funds had been identified to cover deficits for the next two years;
– there is no “on-going” deficit at this time;
– there wouldn’t be a structural deficit unless we decided to incur some other regular expenditures not currently planned;
– our reserves are small so would have to keep expenses on currently unplanned items;
Some of what I thought I heard doesn’t match up with what others heard. There should be much more careful discussion by the Board regarding exactly what cost reduction really happens from a school closure, why this is the only cost cutting method we’ve looked at so far, and it should be done in a way that gives all of us time to understand it before a decision as drastic as school closure is implemented.
Hmmm. So it’s okay for the blog nanny to rip someone by name to shreds, to defame her character and question her motives? But when a person responds, the blog nanny, who likes to use everyone else’s name but his own, erases all record of the response.
I love how all extreme leftists (such as the blog nanny and the owner of this site) start out as defenders of freedom. “I’m a member of the ACLU!,” they declare. “I am for civil rights!”
And then when they get in power, they begin to act just like the pigs in Animal Farm. They show their true colors. They feel that they are in the vanguard, and they have the natural right to lead the plebians.
Thus, I am not allowed to name the blog nanny who removed Colleen’s post and my post. Why not? Because all pigs are apparently not created equal. But one thing we know for sure about the blog nanny and his pig master: they are not kosher.
Hmmm. So it’s okay for the blog nanny to rip someone by name to shreds, to defame her character and question her motives? But when a person responds, the blog nanny, who likes to use everyone else’s name but his own, erases all record of the response.
I love how all extreme leftists (such as the blog nanny and the owner of this site) start out as defenders of freedom. “I’m a member of the ACLU!,” they declare. “I am for civil rights!”
And then when they get in power, they begin to act just like the pigs in Animal Farm. They show their true colors. They feel that they are in the vanguard, and they have the natural right to lead the plebians.
Thus, I am not allowed to name the blog nanny who removed Colleen’s post and my post. Why not? Because all pigs are apparently not created equal. But one thing we know for sure about the blog nanny and his pig master: they are not kosher.
Hmmm. So it’s okay for the blog nanny to rip someone by name to shreds, to defame her character and question her motives? But when a person responds, the blog nanny, who likes to use everyone else’s name but his own, erases all record of the response.
I love how all extreme leftists (such as the blog nanny and the owner of this site) start out as defenders of freedom. “I’m a member of the ACLU!,” they declare. “I am for civil rights!”
And then when they get in power, they begin to act just like the pigs in Animal Farm. They show their true colors. They feel that they are in the vanguard, and they have the natural right to lead the plebians.
Thus, I am not allowed to name the blog nanny who removed Colleen’s post and my post. Why not? Because all pigs are apparently not created equal. But one thing we know for sure about the blog nanny and his pig master: they are not kosher.
Hmmm. So it’s okay for the blog nanny to rip someone by name to shreds, to defame her character and question her motives? But when a person responds, the blog nanny, who likes to use everyone else’s name but his own, erases all record of the response.
I love how all extreme leftists (such as the blog nanny and the owner of this site) start out as defenders of freedom. “I’m a member of the ACLU!,” they declare. “I am for civil rights!”
And then when they get in power, they begin to act just like the pigs in Animal Farm. They show their true colors. They feel that they are in the vanguard, and they have the natural right to lead the plebians.
Thus, I am not allowed to name the blog nanny who removed Colleen’s post and my post. Why not? Because all pigs are apparently not created equal. But one thing we know for sure about the blog nanny and his pig master: they are not kosher.
Rich: You knew the rules, you broke the rules. Get over it.
Rich: You knew the rules, you broke the rules. Get over it.
Rich: You knew the rules, you broke the rules. Get over it.
Rich: You knew the rules, you broke the rules. Get over it.
Allow me to add to Doug Paul Davis’ explanation why all posters should be identified in the manner that they have chosen for themselves. Referencing a post to an individual who has chosen to remain anonymous is fundamentally different from using a person’s name who has voluntarily chosen to enter the “public sphere” through politics or by profession. In addition, attributing authorship to individuals who may or may NOT have posted the comment is a reckless act.
Allow me to add to Doug Paul Davis’ explanation why all posters should be identified in the manner that they have chosen for themselves. Referencing a post to an individual who has chosen to remain anonymous is fundamentally different from using a person’s name who has voluntarily chosen to enter the “public sphere” through politics or by profession. In addition, attributing authorship to individuals who may or may NOT have posted the comment is a reckless act.
Allow me to add to Doug Paul Davis’ explanation why all posters should be identified in the manner that they have chosen for themselves. Referencing a post to an individual who has chosen to remain anonymous is fundamentally different from using a person’s name who has voluntarily chosen to enter the “public sphere” through politics or by profession. In addition, attributing authorship to individuals who may or may NOT have posted the comment is a reckless act.
Allow me to add to Doug Paul Davis’ explanation why all posters should be identified in the manner that they have chosen for themselves. Referencing a post to an individual who has chosen to remain anonymous is fundamentally different from using a person’s name who has voluntarily chosen to enter the “public sphere” through politics or by profession. In addition, attributing authorship to individuals who may or may NOT have posted the comment is a reckless act.
“Rich: You knew the rules, you broke the rules. Get over it.”
Let the sycophancy begin.
“Rich: You knew the rules, you broke the rules. Get over it.”
Let the sycophancy begin.
“Rich: You knew the rules, you broke the rules. Get over it.”
Let the sycophancy begin.
“Rich: You knew the rules, you broke the rules. Get over it.”
Let the sycophancy begin.
Did you or did you not knowing violate a known rule?
Did you or did you not knowing violate a known rule?
Did you or did you not knowing violate a known rule?
Did you or did you not knowing violate a known rule?
Whether by temperment or design, there is one contributor to this blog who has repeatedly disrupted the dialogue flow for which this blog was created. My recommendation is that these perhaps purposefully provocative rantings be ignored, without comment or reply.
Whether by temperment or design, there is one contributor to this blog who has repeatedly disrupted the dialogue flow for which this blog was created. My recommendation is that these perhaps purposefully provocative rantings be ignored, without comment or reply.
Whether by temperment or design, there is one contributor to this blog who has repeatedly disrupted the dialogue flow for which this blog was created. My recommendation is that these perhaps purposefully provocative rantings be ignored, without comment or reply.
Whether by temperment or design, there is one contributor to this blog who has repeatedly disrupted the dialogue flow for which this blog was created. My recommendation is that these perhaps purposefully provocative rantings be ignored, without comment or reply.
“Whether by temperment or design, there is one contributor to this blog who has repeatedly disrupted the dialogue flow for which this blog was created.”
I plead guilty. I am that one person. Feel free to point me out by name. You don’t need to dance around the issue. I always sign my name to every word I write. When I am wrong, I am willing to own up to it.
On this site, I am raking some muck. I almost always disagree with the author of this blog. And as such, I get on the nerves of some people. I don’t care about “dialogue flow.” I was under the impression that blogs were about free speech, about airing one’s views in a give and take forum.
I find it amazing that anyone thinks it is perfectly all right to attack someone in their own home town by name, and do so anonymously. I was raised to live by the Golden Rule — and such defamation is the epitomy of violating that standard.
“Whether by temperment or design, there is one contributor to this blog who has repeatedly disrupted the dialogue flow for which this blog was created.”
I plead guilty. I am that one person. Feel free to point me out by name. You don’t need to dance around the issue. I always sign my name to every word I write. When I am wrong, I am willing to own up to it.
On this site, I am raking some muck. I almost always disagree with the author of this blog. And as such, I get on the nerves of some people. I don’t care about “dialogue flow.” I was under the impression that blogs were about free speech, about airing one’s views in a give and take forum.
I find it amazing that anyone thinks it is perfectly all right to attack someone in their own home town by name, and do so anonymously. I was raised to live by the Golden Rule — and such defamation is the epitomy of violating that standard.
“Whether by temperment or design, there is one contributor to this blog who has repeatedly disrupted the dialogue flow for which this blog was created.”
I plead guilty. I am that one person. Feel free to point me out by name. You don’t need to dance around the issue. I always sign my name to every word I write. When I am wrong, I am willing to own up to it.
On this site, I am raking some muck. I almost always disagree with the author of this blog. And as such, I get on the nerves of some people. I don’t care about “dialogue flow.” I was under the impression that blogs were about free speech, about airing one’s views in a give and take forum.
I find it amazing that anyone thinks it is perfectly all right to attack someone in their own home town by name, and do so anonymously. I was raised to live by the Golden Rule — and such defamation is the epitomy of violating that standard.
“Whether by temperment or design, there is one contributor to this blog who has repeatedly disrupted the dialogue flow for which this blog was created.”
I plead guilty. I am that one person. Feel free to point me out by name. You don’t need to dance around the issue. I always sign my name to every word I write. When I am wrong, I am willing to own up to it.
On this site, I am raking some muck. I almost always disagree with the author of this blog. And as such, I get on the nerves of some people. I don’t care about “dialogue flow.” I was under the impression that blogs were about free speech, about airing one’s views in a give and take forum.
I find it amazing that anyone thinks it is perfectly all right to attack someone in their own home town by name, and do so anonymously. I was raised to live by the Golden Rule — and such defamation is the epitomy of violating that standard.