Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 114

Thread: Where is the contract for Dr Gordon

  1. #46
    you should leave the comments showing Ack in his true light, sexist and lacking empathy. Penalty Box!

  2. #47
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by innovator View Post
    Can you explain how this is a "power grab"? Do you know everything that has gone on between the board and Gordon?
    100's of thousands of dollars? How So?
    An upheaval of the curriculum? Aren't we being a bit dramatic? Is Gordon taking the curriculum with him? He didn't even create it. He inherited it from Riebock and co. Which BTW - that almost completely dismantled experiment WAS an upheaval of the curriculum that did impact a generation of students.

    As far as the teachers. Are they all against this? Go read some of the survey comments of what they have to say about him. It's not all positive. Regardless, it makes me a little nervous when the union loves the super so much they are issuing press releases and holding rallies. Maybe they are afraid a new super will hold them accountable.
    GE Love - I'm still waiting for an answer. You've taken the time to post other comments on this thread. Hopefully you've just been busy shoveling snow all day and will get back at this tomorrow, right?

  3. #48
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by GE Fan View Post
    Nope, merely suggesting that they should take the time to truly understand the full community and not their respective cheering sections. I’m further suggesting that they lead based upon the wants and needs of the community - agenda free. Personally, I don’t think that’s happening.
    True there are community members that like Gordon. There are some that don't like him. Is this all about the communities opinion? There has been some questionable things happening in the district too. I'm sure there is more to the Gordon story than the board could ever even tell us. If your boss was not renewing your contract, could he tell everyone why? It's no different with Gordon and the board. I just have a hard time believing the board members who are not in favor of renewing Gordon's contract are doing it just because they can or to be spiteful. Why subject themselves to all the grief unless they had some real concerns with his leadership?

    I'm seriously asking here - What other agendas are they following that concern you? Furthermore, can you truly ever make the entire community happy?

    I can think of two key issues where the board went against Gordon. First was zeroing the levy last year and only taking a partial levy this year. The district has a surplus of almost $10 million dollars over the past two years. That's 20% of the annual budget. So are we supposed to believe that because a few parents came to board meetings asking to max the levy, that the majority of the community supported that? I think we all want good schools and reasonable taxes. I'm thankful they've made some headway with that and taken a lot of grief from the "new wave of parents" in the process. I'd like those parents to come see me in about 10 years and let me know how they feel about their tax bill. Speaking of the levy issue, that's one issue that was shady from Gordon. The board asked for potential budget cuts and magically he announced that we had a surplus.

    The only other item that I can think of that the board went against the super was specialization for 2nd grade. Thankfully someone came to their senses. Do 2nd graders really need two teachers? This right here is why the teachers want Gordon to stay. They know he'll do anything they want just to keep them happy, regardless of how it impacts kids or our wallets.

  4. #49
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    134
    Question to admin - If people speak at board meetings or provide interviews to the paper where they are named, can their names be mentioned here if quoting or referencing that source?

  5. #50
    Administrator Clamato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    4,081
    Quote Originally Posted by innovator View Post
    Question to admin - If people speak at board meetings or provide interviews to the paper where they are named, can their names be mentioned here if quoting or referencing that source?
    If they go on record, thinking yes, why not? I'd just like to keep a spouse's undergarments out of it.

  6. #51
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by Clamato View Post
    If they go on record, thinking yes, why not? I'd just like to keep a spouse's undergarments out of it.
    When I saw "undergarments" comment, I knew it was only a matter of time before you'd be editing away. I noticed names were removed too, so asking for future reference. Thanks!

  7. #52
    Here’s one interpretation of the “..100’s of thousands of dollars.. and upheaval.. to students” comment from earlier today. “District 100’s of thousands of dollars” has been paid annually to a guy whose education degrees for a master’s and doctorate are from online universities. “upheaval of the curriculum for a generation of students” and endless educational nonsense started well before the current board and there are people in our community to blame for it taking a foothold in the district. The dogma was embraced by our very own Dr. Gordon.

  8. #53
    Forum Regular - Vociferous Class
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by jombl View Post

    • It was Gordon who denied a Glen Ellyn District 41 School Board President access to the school budget.
    • It was Gordon that allowed his non-political neutrality to be lost by being the public face of a failed partisan effort to remove the Glen Ellyn District 41 school board president by asking lawyers to write policy that was in violation of state law.
    • It was Gordon that denied a D41 President access to the School Board's legal counsel.
    • It was Gordon that ordered staff to refuse a board member request to display a simple image at a board meeting.
    • It was Gordon that denied multiple board member requests to view and listen to the school board's own archival records of their own meetings.
    • And it was Gordon that allowed school resources, grounds and education funding to be diverted to Union use for electioneering in a school board race - and then denied and stonewalled the FOIA that brought it to light until forced to follow the law by a judge in a court case he lost using still more education funds.
    Let's see if we can take these on 1 by 1 (But with a little less of Jombl's pomposity and superiority complex)
    1. It was Gordon that denied a board members request to view and listen to the school
      board's own archival records of their own meetings.

      - This had nothing to do with Gordon. It was the action of the Board, and as far as I can
      tell, the issue was that the Board felt it had to grant access rather than just let any new
      board member free access to the older recordings. There was no clear policy on it, and
      there was a similar case in a neighboring district (U46, I believe).
      - Legislation passed soon after that changed ability of new members to listen. Believe
      Clark/Buchholz started to request this before they were even seated (sworn in). Once they
      came on board wanted to make sure there was a process in place and to also confirm that
      closed session archive tapes were used for reference or context and not to revisit or
      change previous decisions.
    2. It was Gordon that denied the current D41 President access to the School Board's
      legal counsel.

      - Again, this really had nothing to do with Gordon, although he might have advised then
      seated board president, Erica, of the policy. Board members have access to board counsel
      through board policy that states you go through board president (See 2:160, and it also
      states that the “board” can authorize other members to consult with attorney) Just imagine is any board member could consult attorney at any
      time the chaos that might ensue
    3. It was Gordon who denied the now Glen Ellyn District 41 President access to the
      school budget.

      - There has been exhaustive forum discussion on this. Basically, Clarkholz wanted a
      detailed breakdown of salary/staff under each section, which was not easily available.
      - Board members can ask for information, but the super doesn’t report to individual board
      members. In this situation, Gordon came back to board for consensus b/c the request was
      going to require a decent amount of staff time. Note, president does not have any more
      authority than other members. Imagine if Paul and his staff had to respond to every
      individual board members request, they would never get their own work done - especially
      when those requests required creation of documents, etc that didn’t already exist.
    4. It was Gordon that sought to overthrow a previous Glen Ellyn District 41 school
      board president by bringing in lawyers to remove him from his position.

      This had nothing to do with Gordon. It was the weird machinations of the Board.
      Check Bob Solak’s description of events on the GE Forum.
      http://glenellynforum.com/showthread.php?2739-Dr-Gordon-Lovefest-
      %26%2310084%3B%26%2365039%3B&p=43999&viewfull=1#po st43999
    5. It was Gordon that ordered staff to refuse a board members request to display a
      simple image at a board meeting.

      - Prior to Clark/Buchholz being on board, members never presented data but instead
      reviewed and approved information provided by staff. It is suspected that Clark gave
      slides to a staff member and presented but no one had seen them yet. Individual board
      members don’t direct staff. Note: If anyone can figure out exactly when this was then we might be able to better
      understand the situation
    6. It was Gordon that allowed school resources, grounds and education funding to be
      diverted to Union use for electioneering in a school board race - and then denied
      and stonewalled the FOIA that brought it to light until forced to follow the law by a
      judge in a court case he lost using still more education funds.

      - This is a fantastical stretch of what occurred.
      - What was not understood is that unions have the right to form PACs and engage in own
      discussion regarding board members but not on school time or using school resources.
      Conversations about meeting but not necessarily specific candidates - some examples
      where line was crossed and Paul told them they couldn’t do it but Cooper used this as a
      witch hunt. Cooper wanted details on how Kellam was reprimanded - which is none of
      his business. This FOIA from Cooper hurt trust in being able to communicate with
      anyone and historically conducted union business over district email. Cooper could also
      have gone through the ‘free’ avenue of appealing to AG’s office, which he didn’t. (More on that separately)
    7. Turning over All District family emails to 41 Forward for Kids
      - This has been previously addressed (by Ms. Herbold, I think). While Paul probably should have
      instructed the FOIA officer to hand over only the few email addresses that were
      requested, nothing happened that violated any policies. Anyone who provided their email
      address to the district had the choice of opting out of having their info given to a third
      party. In responding to an FOIA request, the district is not obligated to create any new
      documents. The request was answered with the document that contained all of the
      disclosable email addresses. If the response to the initial request had include only the
      handful of listed emails, a second request would have been forthcoming to request all the
      available ones.
      - Question is on if district consulted attorney on this one or not but info above is correct.
    8. He waited to the last minute to get his IL educator license
      - He did it before the deadline. Why does it matter how long it took? Additionally, he was
      licensed in CO. State licensing requirements are not uniform; it's not unusual to have to
      do additional testing or take coursework when moving to another state. Maybe he was
      busy running the schools, and completing the additional requirements took a backseat,
      or maybe the additional coursework required that much time to finish.
      Note: Someone told me that people should really be irate over the cost to the individual
      for fulfilling all these requirements...very little reciprocity amongst states. Not at ALL
      unusual.
    9. Gordon has been busy interviewing elsewhere over the last year or so.
      - Based on publicly available information, recruiters have approached Paul. It’s perfectly
      reasonable for anyone to take a look around at other opportunities. Even more reasonable
      for someone working in the hostile environment that Paul is in.
    10. Gordon makes a lot of money, and he has a degree from an online college.
      - Paul’s compensation appears to be in line with other superintendents in Illinois. (In the
      same situation, I wouldn’t do it for any less.) Experience and track record are much more
      important than where Paul received his degree. Taking potshots at this level hardly
      deserves a response. (Also, his most recent and relevant experience is right here in D41.)

  9. #54
    Forum Regular - Vociferous Class
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    514
    Jeff Cooper’s FOIA & Lawsuit

    1. Don't let Mr. Cooper confuse you about the nature of the lawsuit. He sued to get
    access to some emails from teachers. The judge ruled that he was entitled to those
    emails. The lawsuit and ruling had nothing to do with the content of those emails.
    2.The emails that were subsequently released apparently contained some communications
    regarding a political action committee for education. Both district policy and Illinois law prohibit public
    employees from participating in political activity during working hours or using
    government facilities. This is the "illegal activity" that Mr. Cooper so righteously
    declares that he uncovered.
    3. Mr. Cooper's FOIA request for the emails was denied, under the advice of the
    district's legal counsel, and by a majority vote of the board. The district
    offered to submit to the State's Attorney General for an opinion, but Mr. Cooper
    decided to sue instead. You can find some of the details above in this article:
    http://www.dailyherald.com/article/2...ews/161028967/ I'm sure you can
    search for some others online.
    4. There is legal precedence in other states where it has been decided that teacher
    email is private, unless it involves government (school) activity. Here are two
    cases, one in Michigan and one in Wisconsin:
    https://www.secrestwardle.com/upload...ity_020410.pdf
    https://www.bakkenorman.com/municipa...t-august-2010/
    5. The Illinois Association of School Boards cites the second case above and says:
    "Though not applicable in Illinois, the Freedom of Information Act 5 ILCS 140/
    has the same connection to a governmental function that is discussed in this
    opinion." (They also warn to avoid using school email systems for personal
    communication.) https://www.iasb.com/law/decisions.c...ion Act - FOIA
    6. The Illinois Freedom of Information act covers "electronic communications ...
    pertaining to the transaction of public business ... in the possession of, or under the
    control of any public body."
    http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs...85&ChapterID=2
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    Here is where my opinion starts. Please note that I have no legal training.
    Based on the above, I think it was perfectly reasonable to withhold the
    requested information, and ask for an outside opinion. There was precedent in other states
    saying that private email was not subject to FOIA disclosure. The Illinois FOIA
    specifically states that it covers communication pertaining to "public business". That
    would imply that private communication is excluded. Despite Mr. Cooper's assertions
    otherwise, he was on a witch hunt. When this situation is referenced, it always an attempt
    to drag a bunch of names through the mud: including the superintendent, current and
    former board members, and several teachers.
    If Cooper truly was worried about the political activity occurring during school hours,
    and simply wanted it to stop, then the superintendent's assurances that the matter had
    been appropriately handled should have been enough. Mr. Cooper's continual
    mudslinging of those involved lays bare his true motives.

  10. #55
    Forum Regular - Vociferous Class
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    514
    A short List of my own

    There is overwhelming support for Dr. Gordon because teachers will tell you they’ve never had a superintendent who listened so well to their ideas, concerns and needs.
    He’s in the schools all the time. He meets with teachers and staff constantly and even the kids in the district know, like, and respect him.
    Dr. Gordon has improved communication methods and frequency from and within the district.
    He has implemented, adjusted and carefully evaluated programs that are valued by families.
    He was instrumental in encouraging the special education audit and has been tireless in effectuating change in those programs and in helping those at-risk kids.
    Additionally, several lofty and difficult goals and requirements were put in place for Dr. Gordon by this board and the prior board, and he’s met nearly all of them.
    As the single “employee” of the school board, his success is undeniable. People in this community believe in treating others with respect and acknowledging a job well done.

  11. #56
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by GE Love View Post
    A short List of my own....
    GE LOVE -

    I find it very sad/interesting that you ignore my questions to you and then you post all of this above.

    To add to that - That's NOT "A Short List of YOUR Own".
    You just copied and pasted what a parent posted on a facebook page about Gordon. If you believe all of that as well, why don't you give us the facts to support it?

    Some questions/comments about that list:
    - Teachers will tell you they've never has a superintendent who listened so well to their ideas, concerns and needs. - Well, in the survey, one teacher had this to say about Paul, "I constantly feel like I am not being told the complete truth when he speaks. I have spoken to him about issues on several occasions and he has never followed up or shown any effort to change or address anything we talked about."
    - The kids in the district know, like and respect him. - Where are you gathering this fact from? We don't survey our kids on the superintendent, do we?
    - He's in the schools all the time and meets with staff and teachers constantly - So are you privy to his schedule? Please share.
    - Implemented, adjusted and evaluated programs that are valued by families. - Where was the evaluation of academic/social/emotional impact (what the board promised they would provide) of changes? Also, I think that should be changed to say "loved by teachers".
    - "Instrumental in encouraging the special education audit" - You're kidding, right? It astounds me that Gordon continues to receive accolades for improvements to the program. Yet, he was at the heart of causing the problems and then ignored the concerns of parents for years. Only when parents started speaking louder and a few board members pushed, did he look to address them.
    - Several lofty and difficult goals have been met - Maybe he's doing well in some areas, but as far as "ACADEMICS" are concerned, he's only met 40% of his goals. Ouch!



    To make it easier, here's my post that I'm still waiting for a reply on:
    Quote Originally Posted by GE Love View Post
    Better him than Clarkhholz. This power grab is going to cost this District 100's of thousands of dollars and upheaval of the curriculum for a generation of students. Luckily, the Teachers are against this as well, so they should be looking towards the students' best interests even if Clarkhholz are not.
    Can you explain how this is a "power grab"? Do you know everything that has gone on between the board and Gordon?
    100's of thousands of dollars? How So?
    An upheaval of the curriculum? Aren't we being a bit dramatic? Is Gordon taking the curriculum with him? He didn't even create it. He inherited it from Riebock and co. Which BTW - that almost completely dismantled experiment WAS an upheaval of the curriculum that did impact a generation of students.

    As far as the teachers. Are they all against this? Go read some of the survey comments of what they have to say about him. It's not all positive. Regardless, it makes me a little nervous when the union loves the super so much they are issuing press releases and holding rallies. Maybe they are afraid a new super will hold them accountable.
    Last edited by innovator; 01-20-2019 at 12:16 PM. Reason: added post for GE Love

  12. #57
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by GE Love View Post
    Let's see if we can take these on 1 by 1 (But with a little less of Jombl's pomposity and superiority complex)
    So are you the pot or the kettle today?


    It was Gordon that denied a board members request to view and listen to the school
    board's own archival records of their own meetings.

    - This had nothing to do with Gordon. It was the action of the Board, and as far as I can
    tell, the issue was that the Board felt it had to grant access rather than just let any new
    board member free access to the older recordings. There was no clear policy on it, and
    there was a similar case in a neighboring district (U46, I believe). Legislation passed soon after that changed ability of new members to listen. Believe
    Clark/Buchholz started to request this before they were even seated (sworn in). Once they
    came on board wanted to make sure there was a process in place and to also confirm that
    closed session archive tapes were used for reference or context and not to revisit or
    change previous decisions.
    I believe Clark and Buchholz asked to listen to recordings, but said they could wait until seated. They were still denied. And there was a policy that said board members had access to closed session audio. Clearly the board and Gordon didn't like Clark and Buchholz and tried to figure out a way to stop them.


    It was Gordon that ordered staff to refuse a board members request to display a
    simple image at a board meeting.

    - Prior to Clark/Buchholz being on board, members never presented data but instead
    reviewed and approved information provided by staff. It is suspected that Clark gave
    slides to a staff member and presented but no one had seen them yet. Individual board
    members don’t direct staff. Note: If anyone can figure out exactly when this was then we might be able to better
    understand the situation
    Not true. John Kenwood used to show slides all the time. I don’t know what incident you are referring to, but isn’t the purpose of the meetings for board members to share their thoughts and ask questions? So if a board member puts together slides to help do that, they have to share them with the board in advance? I suppose it’s not a bad idea, but maybe it’s not always possible. Couldn’t you also argue that board members shouldn’t make any points at meetings that no one has heard before. I don’t think that is how things are supposed to work. So for Gordon to deny a board member display an image at a board meeting leads me to believe he has something to hide.


    Turning over All District family emails to 41 Forward for Kids
    - This has been previously addressed (by Ms. Herbold, I think). While Paul probably should have
    instructed the FOIA officer to hand over only the few email addresses that were
    requested, nothing happened that violated any policies. Anyone who provided their email
    address to the district had the choice of opting out of having their info given to a third
    party. In responding to an FOIA request, the district is not obligated to create any new
    documents. The request was answered with the document that contained all of the
    disclosable email addresses. If the response to the initial request had include only the
    handful of listed emails, a second request would have been forthcoming to request all the
    available ones.
    - Question is on if district consulted attorney on this one or not but info above is correct.
    I don't understand how this can even be defended. Ms. Herbold, one of the referendum committee heads, FOIEed for only 17 emails. Why 17? Why a random list of names? Has any justification ever been given? Someone knew exactly what they were doing. Maybe Ms. Herbold was just following directions, but WHO gave those directions? Gordon just apologizes and we forget it all? It was a breach of the trust of the community and someone should have been held responsible. No one was, so it falls on Gordon.


    Gordon has been busy interviewing elsewhere over the last year or so.
    - Based on publicly available information, recruiters have approached Paul. It’s perfectly
    reasonable for anyone to take a look around at other opportunities. Even more reasonable
    for someone working in the hostile environment that Paul is in.
    He was interviewing for jobs while still under the prior board (including Nelson, Elgar, Escalante, etc....). So what allegiance does he have to this district?


    Gordon makes a lot of money, and he has a degree from an online college.
    - Paul’s compensation appears to be in line with other superintendents in Illinois. (In the
    same situation, I wouldn’t do it for any less.) Experience and track record are much more
    important than where Paul received his degree. Taking potshots at this level hardly
    deserves a response. (Also, his most recent and relevant experience is right here in D41.)[/LIST]
    In line with other supers who have the same size school district and same number of schools? That's something I'd like to see in comparison. Look at the Wheaton 200 super. I think Gordon makes about the same and that's a consolidated district managing K-12 managing 20 schools (4 times what Gordon does).

  13. #58
    Forum Regular - Vociferous Class
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by innovator View Post
    I find it very sad/interesting.......

    The list speaks for itself. I agree with it absolutely and I am sure the author has given permission to reprint in this context.

    Some questions/comments about that list:
    - Teachers will tell you they've never has a superintendent who listened so well to their ideas, concerns and needs. - Well, in the survey, one teacher had this to say about Paul, "I constantly feel like I am not being told the complete truth when he speaks. I have spoken to him about issues on several occasions and he has never followed up or shown any effort to change or address anything we talked about." [1 Teacher??? What was the percentage of teachers in the survey approving of the current Super and the job he is doing]
    - The kids in the district know, like and respect him. - Where are you gathering this fact from? We don't survey our kids on the superintendent, do we? [I][Maybe not, but I am around the schools a lot and I see the children and how the interact, more importantly, the comfort with which they interact with this kind man][/I]
    -
    He's in the schools all the time and meets with staff and teachers constantly - So are you privy to his schedule? Please share. [You are welcome to FOIA, or ask, for his schedule if you don't believe me]
    - Implemented, adjusted and evaluated programs that are valued by families. - Where was the evaluation of academic/social/emotional impact (what the board promised they would provide) of changes? Also, I think that should be changed to say "loved by teachers". [Why is "Loved by Teachers", a major stakeholder in this equation, a bad thing in your eyes?]
    - "Instrumental in encouraging the special education audit" - You're kidding, right? [Nope, wouldn't do that to you]It astounds me that Gordon continues to receive accolades for improvements to the program. Yet, he was at the heart of causing the problems and then ignored the concerns of parents for years. [Back at ya, can you provide a link] Only when parents started speaking louder and a few board members pushed, did he look to address them. [I][Link][/I]
    - Several lofty and difficult goals have been met - Maybe he's doing well in some areas, but as far as "ACADEMICS" are concerned, he's only met 40% of his goals. Ouch! [He has met 77% of the Long Term goals set for this District. Give him more time and I am sure he can address your concerns]



    To make it easier, here's my post that I'm still waiting for a reply on:


    Can you explain how this is a "power grab"? Do you know everything that has gone on between the board and Gordon? [I have quite a bit of personal background history here]
    100's of thousands of dollars? How So? [Do you truly believe that Clarkhholz would go to this length and not make additional changes with a handpicked Super? We are already going to have to pay for a National search firm as well as the costs associated with a new Super. Are we going to settle for less of a candidate to save a few bucks? Would a Super come in and say "Sure, I like what you all are doing here. I will just tie my incentives to a plan I didn't come up with" That will cost us]
    An upheaval of the curriculum? Aren't we being a bit dramatic? Is Gordon taking the curriculum with him? He didn't even create it. He inherited it from Riebock and co. Which BTW - that almost completely dismantled experiment WAS an upheaval of the curriculum that did impact a generation of students. [Who helped to assess and dismantle the parts that did not work? See answer above for a new Super's opinion on curriculum]

    As far as the teachers. Are they all against this? Go read some of the survey comments of what they have to say about him. It's not all positive. Regardless, it makes me a little nervous when the union loves the super so much they are issuing press releases and holding rallies. Maybe they are afraid a new super will hold them accountable.
    [Please provide evidence that Dr Gordon does not hold teachers to very high standards expected in D41. Why are you nervous that Dr Gordon is admired and respected by the organization that represents teachers. The same Teachers that provided high satisfaction in the same survey you utilize? 100% satisfaction would be hard to come by for anyone, but you can't cherry pick responses. What are the Survey results for Board satisfaction?]
    Last edited by GE Love; 01-20-2019 at 01:15 PM. Reason: highlighted better

  14. #59
    Forum Regular - Vociferous Class
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by innovator View Post
    So are you the pot or the kettle today? [Hopefiully the Kettle....I don't inhale]

    Last one for today Innovator - We could circle this wagon all day.


    I believe Clark and Buchholz asked to listen to recordings, but said they could wait until seated. They were still denied. And there was a policy that said board members had access to closed session audio. Clearly the board and Gordon didn't like Clark and Buchholz and tried to figure out a way to stop them. [You have no proof that Dr Gordon "didn't like" Clarkhholz. He was following directives of the current Board]




    Not true. John Kenwood used to show slides all the time. [Were they submitted prior to presenting in a public meeting?] I don’t know what incident you are referring to, but isn’t the purpose of the meetings for board members to share their thoughts and ask questions? So if a board member puts together slides to help do that, they have to share them with the board in advance? I suppose it’s not a bad idea, but maybe it’s not always possible. Couldn’t you also argue that board members shouldn’t make any points at meetings that no one has heard before. I don’t think that is how things are supposed to work. So for Gordon to deny a board member display an image at a board meeting leads me to believe he has something to hide. [Couldn't you argue that a Board member could present a slide with non factual data that hasn't been proven?]




    I don't understand how this can even be defended. Ms. Herbold, one of the referendum committee heads, FOIEed for only 17 emails. Why 17? Why a random list of names? Has any justification ever been given? Someone knew exactly what they were doing. Maybe Ms. Herbold was just following directions, but WHO gave those directions? Gordon just apologizes and we forget it all? It was a breach of the trust of the community and someone should have been held responsible. No one was, so it falls on Gordon. [There was no breach of trust. All names were able to be disclosed per Board policy.]




    He was interviewing for jobs while still under the prior board (including Nelson, Elgar, Escalante, etc....). So what allegiance does he have to this district? [His allegiance is to this District via a contract he signed as well as the unimpeachable character he has shown in the face of this undeserved onslaught]




    In line with other supers who have the same size school district and same number of schools? That's something I'd like to see in comparison. Look at the Wheaton 200 super. I think Gordon makes about the same and that's a consolidated district managing K-12 managing 20 schools (4 times what Gordon does).
    [So? Finish your thought...provide a link with Super compensation based on number of schools and enrollment. Do you think we are going to get someone cheaper?]

  15. #60
    Forum Regular sandbox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by GE Love View Post
    Let's see if we can take these on 1 by 1 (But with a little less of Jombl's pomposity and superiority complex)
    1. It was Gordon that denied a board members request to view and listen to the school
      board's own archival records of their own meetings.

      - This had nothing to do with Gordon. It was the action of the Board, and as far as I can
      tell, the issue was that the Board felt it had to grant access rather than just let any new
      board member free access to the older recordings. There was no clear policy on it, and
      there was a similar case in a neighboring district (U46, I believe).
      - Legislation passed soon after that changed ability of new members to listen. Believe
      Clark/Buchholz started to request this before they were even seated (sworn in). Once they
      came on board wanted to make sure there was a process in place and to also confirm that
      closed session archive tapes were used for reference or context and not to revisit or
      change previous decisions.
    2. It was Gordon that denied the current D41 President access to the School Board's
      legal counsel.

      - Again, this really had nothing to do with Gordon, although he might have advised then
      seated board president, Erica, of the policy. Board members have access to board counsel
      through board policy that states you go through board president (See 2:160, and it also
      states that the “board” can authorize other members to consult with attorney) Just imagine is any board member could consult attorney at any
      time the chaos that might ensue
    3. It was Gordon who denied the now Glen Ellyn District 41 President access to the
      school budget.

      - There has been exhaustive forum discussion on this. Basically, Clarkholz wanted a
      detailed breakdown of salary/staff under each section, which was not easily available.
      - Board members can ask for information, but the super doesn’t report to individual board
      members. In this situation, Gordon came back to board for consensus b/c the request was
      going to require a decent amount of staff time. Note, president does not have any more
      authority than other members. Imagine if Paul and his staff had to respond to every
      individual board members request, they would never get their own work done - especially
      when those requests required creation of documents, etc that didn’t already exist.
    4. It was Gordon that sought to overthrow a previous Glen Ellyn District 41 school
      board president by bringing in lawyers to remove him from his position.

      This had nothing to do with Gordon. It was the weird machinations of the Board.
      Check Bob Solak’s description of events on the GE Forum.
      http://glenellynforum.com/showthread.php?2739-Dr-Gordon-Lovefest-
      %26%2310084%3B%26%2365039%3B&p=43999&viewfull=1#po st43999
    5. It was Gordon that ordered staff to refuse a board members request to display a
      simple image at a board meeting.

      - Prior to Clark/Buchholz being on board, members never presented data but instead
      reviewed and approved information provided by staff. It is suspected that Clark gave
      slides to a staff member and presented but no one had seen them yet. Individual board
      members don’t direct staff. Note: If anyone can figure out exactly when this was then we might be able to better
      understand the situation
    6. It was Gordon that allowed school resources, grounds and education funding to be
      diverted to Union use for electioneering in a school board race - and then denied
      and stonewalled the FOIA that brought it to light until forced to follow the law by a
      judge in a court case he lost using still more education funds.

      - This is a fantastical stretch of what occurred.
      - What was not understood is that unions have the right to form PACs and engage in own
      discussion regarding board members but not on school time or using school resources.
      Conversations about meeting but not necessarily specific candidates - some examples
      where line was crossed and Paul told them they couldn’t do it but Cooper used this as a
      witch hunt. Cooper wanted details on how Kellam was reprimanded - which is none of
      his business. This FOIA from Cooper hurt trust in being able to communicate with
      anyone and historically conducted union business over district email. Cooper could also
      have gone through the ‘free’ avenue of appealing to AG’s office, which he didn’t. (More on that separately)
    7. Turning over All District family emails to 41 Forward for Kids
      - This has been previously addressed (by Ms. Herbold, I think). While Paul probably should have
      instructed the FOIA officer to hand over only the few email addresses that were
      requested, nothing happened that violated any policies. Anyone who provided their email
      address to the district had the choice of opting out of having their info given to a third
      party. In responding to an FOIA request, the district is not obligated to create any new
      documents. The request was answered with the document that contained all of the
      disclosable email addresses. If the response to the initial request had include only the
      handful of listed emails, a second request would have been forthcoming to request all the
      available ones.
      - Question is on if district consulted attorney on this one or not but info above is correct.
    8. He waited to the last minute to get his IL educator license
      - He did it before the deadline. Why does it matter how long it took? Additionally, he was
      licensed in CO. State licensing requirements are not uniform; it's not unusual to have to
      do additional testing or take coursework when moving to another state. Maybe he was
      busy running the schools, and completing the additional requirements took a backseat,
      or maybe the additional coursework required that much time to finish.
      Note: Someone told me that people should really be irate over the cost to the individual
      for fulfilling all these requirements...very little reciprocity amongst states. Not at ALL
      unusual.
    9. Gordon has been busy interviewing elsewhere over the last year or so.
      - Based on publicly available information, recruiters have approached Paul. It’s perfectly
      reasonable for anyone to take a look around at other opportunities. Even more reasonable
      for someone working in the hostile environment that Paul is in.
    10. Gordon makes a lot of money, and he has a degree from an online college.
      - Paul’s compensation appears to be in line with other superintendents in Illinois. (In the
      same situation, I wouldn’t do it for any less.) Experience and track record are much more
      important than where Paul received his degree. Taking potshots at this level hardly
      deserves a response. (Also, his most recent and relevant experience is right here in D41.)
    Ah, the old “it’s someone else’s fault” defense. How convenient! 😎

    Guilty by association, period. End of story.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •