Monday, May 19, 2008
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Teamworks Proposal
The School Board Working Session is this Tuesday at 5:50 p.m. with the School Board Meeting starting at 8:00 p.m. The public is welcome to attend either session. This is where the ground work is being laid for the tough decisions facing the District this year. It starts with whether or not to use Teamworks.
I asked Susan Hintz to clarify why Teamworks is necessary given the large number of collaborative work groups that the district already facilitates without the need of an outside consultant.
"We believe that outside facilitation is imperative if the board chooses to consider short and long term needs. My recommendation is based on best practice recommendations from other metro area school districts and our own experience utilizing outside experts in high stakes conditions. TeamWorks was selected from three firms interviewed in a competitive process. We have found their technical expertise invaluable." ~ Susan Hintz
The District is in a tough situation no matter what and is facing the proverbial double-edged sword. If they recommend using a consultant (for $90k) then their critics will view them as incompetent in the ways of facilitation. It should be noted that Teamworks is being hired for two components: facilitation and research. If the District does not use an outside consultant, then there appears to be no attempt at using a neutral third party (although I know that Teamworks is questionable as a neutral third party when they are hired by the Administration).
Tune into the Blog on Tuesday night. You can simply lurk in the background and read or participate! The live blog format gives the audience the ability to participate and have your comments posted to all. We used the live blog during the last meeting and had great response.
I asked Susan Hintz to clarify why Teamworks is necessary given the large number of collaborative work groups that the district already facilitates without the need of an outside consultant.
"We believe that outside facilitation is imperative if the board chooses to consider short and long term needs. My recommendation is based on best practice recommendations from other metro area school districts and our own experience utilizing outside experts in high stakes conditions. TeamWorks was selected from three firms interviewed in a competitive process. We have found their technical expertise invaluable." ~ Susan Hintz
The District is in a tough situation no matter what and is facing the proverbial double-edged sword. If they recommend using a consultant (for $90k) then their critics will view them as incompetent in the ways of facilitation. It should be noted that Teamworks is being hired for two components: facilitation and research. If the District does not use an outside consultant, then there appears to be no attempt at using a neutral third party (although I know that Teamworks is questionable as a neutral third party when they are hired by the Administration).
Tune into the Blog on Tuesday night. You can simply lurk in the background and read or participate! The live blog format gives the audience the ability to participate and have your comments posted to all. We used the live blog during the last meeting and had great response.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Requests
I want to bring to light several groups of parents and organizations that requested information from the District in the last several months under the Minnesota Data Practices Act (the state version of the Freedom of Information Act) and the difficulties the groups are encountering. First, who is requesting additional public information, such as email communication, from the District?
* A significant media outlet in the Twin Cities area.
* A concerned parent wanting to understand the proposal process.
* A law firm.
* A group of parents originally fighting the proposal, but now just wanting to understand what happened.
None of the above individuals or groups received the requested information. Here are some facts:
* The District compiled around 57,000 emails to turn over.
* The District appeared to be ready to turn over the 57,000 emails, but then hired a law firm, using tax payer money, to deal with the requests.
* Each of the groups made multiple requests over the last three months.
* At least one of the groups filed a complaint after working very hard to come to an agreement with the District.
The reason I am letting people know is because I believe our District should have nothing to hide and should not use tax payer money to fight the public for information that it is legally obligated to provide. In the last School Board Working Session, the Administration and School Board spoke about an open and public process. They do not appear to be very open at all.
After all, if the District has nothing to hide in this process, then there is absolutely nothing they should worry about and should be able to very rapidly comply.
The only sticking point is reviewing the emails for confidentiality and privilege. This is an important step, and one in which they are obligated by law to do. The District has certainly already done this for litigation they are currently involved with and has established processes. I work in the legal industry and know that reviewing for confidentiality and privilege is something very simple and rapidly done. Again, this should not be something that holds up the request or creates any sort of substantial burden.
The District's actions are clearly questionable. Why did the District bring in a law firm to deal with a simple request? What do they have to hide? Why are they spending additional tax-payer money on outside counsel?
I'm probably just missing something. So, let me know what you think.
* A significant media outlet in the Twin Cities area.
* A concerned parent wanting to understand the proposal process.
* A law firm.
* A group of parents originally fighting the proposal, but now just wanting to understand what happened.
None of the above individuals or groups received the requested information. Here are some facts:
* The District compiled around 57,000 emails to turn over.
* The District appeared to be ready to turn over the 57,000 emails, but then hired a law firm, using tax payer money, to deal with the requests.
* Each of the groups made multiple requests over the last three months.
* At least one of the groups filed a complaint after working very hard to come to an agreement with the District.
The reason I am letting people know is because I believe our District should have nothing to hide and should not use tax payer money to fight the public for information that it is legally obligated to provide. In the last School Board Working Session, the Administration and School Board spoke about an open and public process. They do not appear to be very open at all.
After all, if the District has nothing to hide in this process, then there is absolutely nothing they should worry about and should be able to very rapidly comply.
The only sticking point is reviewing the emails for confidentiality and privilege. This is an important step, and one in which they are obligated by law to do. The District has certainly already done this for litigation they are currently involved with and has established processes. I work in the legal industry and know that reviewing for confidentiality and privilege is something very simple and rapidly done. Again, this should not be something that holds up the request or creates any sort of substantial burden.
The District's actions are clearly questionable. Why did the District bring in a law firm to deal with a simple request? What do they have to hide? Why are they spending additional tax-payer money on outside counsel?
I'm probably just missing something. So, let me know what you think.
Monday, May 5, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
