Vote against bullying UPDATED

Election Day is November 5, 2013. There are four seats and four candidates running for School Board. Search for these names on Lebo Citizens and see if you agree with their philosophies.

Mary Birks (incumbent)
Dan Remely (incumbent)
Mike Riemer
Bill Moorhead

The incumbents raised student parking fees, charged activity fees, promised a renovation under $95 million, cut the budget to the bone, and then turned around and gave sizable increases to our superintendent, who presently makes more than the PA Superintendent of the Year, in addition to having zero experience as a superintendent prior to his contract with Mt. Lebanon.

The incumbents have voted yes on every issue, including change orders. The incumbents have taken it upon themselves to try and ratchet up sundry "zero tolerance" policies, with great fanfare to the public. Whether these policies (hazing, bullying, plagiarism, alcohol, drugs, etc.) were well-intentioned is of little concern; the fact is they sent strong signals to parents that the District wasn't going to allow certain behaviors.

Now along comes Mrs. Harouse who reads an article in "The Devil's Advocate" and takes umbridge at it. Whether the article is satire or not is a side-issue. She goes to the Board and lets 'em have it. The Board, in class Lebo fashion, circles the wagons and excuses the article on First Amendment grounds. Again, that's not the point. I think we all get it.

The point is that over the years, District officials have crowed about how they want to protect the children from harm - harm in all of its various forms - and now they have to deal with a parent that takes them seriously. However, given that various policies at the high school are routinely ignored or flouted, I am surprised that anyone takes the District seriously.

I had a record breaking week and want to thank all those who read, commented, and sent personal emails to me. Obviously, the Devil's Advocate article struck a chord. One of the over two hundred comments contained a list of bullying characteristics.

These are some overt and covert bullying behaviors that parents may experience when dealing with the administration. Each behavior may vary in its intensity, severity, duration, etc. Parents should not experience any of these behaviors when dealing the school district.  

Hostility
Dirty looks/gestures
Invasion of personal space
Curt tones of voice
Social exclusion/isolation
“Silent treatment”
Making light of bullying
Calling the parent “crazy”
Referring the parent to counselors
Harassment
Excessively critical
Repeated reminders of errors and mistakes
Intolerance
Impatience
Intimidation
False/exaggerated reports against the parent
Shouting/yelling/ swearing at the parent
Throwing objects
Failure to maintain hostile-free communication
Insulting or threatening phone messages/emails
Theft
Attempting to turn others against the parent
Unfair treatment
Gossip/rumor-mongering
Threats
Humiliation
Condescending
Deception/lying
Vindictive
Punishing
Hinting that the parent should move
Verbally attacking the parent in public/private
Excluding the parent/family from important meetings or activities
Withholding pertinent information from the parent
Blocking opportunities for engagement with the school
Unjust use of authority
Excessive monitoring
Unreasonable demands
Ignoring/undervaluing belittling the parent’s concerns
Defamation: false attacks against the parent’s reputation
Excessive teasing or cruelty
Questioning the parent’s competence
Excessive sarcasm
Destruction of property

Sounds like a typical school board meeting, doesn't it? I guess eye rolling would fall under "dirty looks/gestures." One person wrote, "Residents may want to carry a "Bully" sign to raise each time they observe one of these behaviors in the Commission or School Board meetings." Ask and you shall receive, my friend.

Stop the bullying sign
Stop the bullying bumper sticker

Unfortunately, the four candidates will still win. We know it. They know it. Have you seen any yard signs? No. Perhaps it is because three of them lost the best candidate on their slate. The fourth candidate only had State Rep signs.

I am still voting for Moe Howard, Curly Howard, Larry Fine, and Shemp Howard*, the Four Stooges. Don't sit home on Election Day. Get out and vote. Let the school board members know that you are saying, "No to bullying."

*Last names added for voting purposes. ;)

Update October 27, 2013 7:45 PM Mt. Lebanon boy gets suspended for class assignment.

All good things must come to an end

I have been very generous with allowing anonymous comments even though my policy says that people have to sign their names. This past week has been especially brutal.

I have thought further about things and listened to input from experienced bloggers in the Pittsburgh area.  Here are two recommendations that were made to me:

One, anonymous comments are a terrible idea. Enforcing a "no anonymous comments" policy is difficult (because people can adopt fake names), and tends to cut down on the number of people who comment. But the improvement in civility is significant, and for every person who walks away because they wanted to be anonymous, there will be someone else who shows up because they like the reasonable tone of the place. Also, even though some people will say that they have to be anonymous because they are afraid of retribution, the truth is that if retribution is out there, then retribution will find you, whether or not you're anonymous. If people want to avoid retribution, then they should lock themselves in their bedrooms.

Two, call out bullying for what it is: efforts to use the Internet to intimidate or silence people who don't agree with the speaker. We teach our kids not to bully, but we (the collective "we") engage in it all the time. The blogosphere is full of behavior that we would not tolerate in our own children. A lot of your anonymous commenters are using anonymity to bully, just as much as some members of your School Board have bullied the community. Even some of your "signed" commenters engage in bullying.

I have reason to believe that some of the comments submitted came from our elected officials. This blog will not be used to enable those who continue to bully the residents of Mt. Lebanon.

I realize that the amount of comments will drop significantly, but so will the bullying.  I am sorry that it had to come to this, but I have had enough.

Nothing has changed.

Looking at the Blog-Lebo archives,   http://bloglebo.blogspot.com/2009/04/ultimatum-from-some-athletic-supporters.html  David Reese needs to get new material.  His letter, which he has not permitted me to reprint,  is quite similar, almost verbatim in his comments.  Mike Madison called his actions bullying on April 14, 2009. 

I see and read bullying here (in the "questionnaire"). I object to bullying by adults even more than I object to bullying by children. Our kids deserve better models.

In looking at Dave Reese's letter to me, I have done some investigating. It appears that the athletic supporters are waiting for a defined project before contributing any money. How much more defined can it be? He has a $30 million facility PURELY FOR ATHLETICS going in as part of the HS project.  How much more defined is that?

His original idea was for a fieldhouse on the Rockpile.  It would have provided all-weather indoor practice facilities for the sports teams. They had suggested that they could raise half the cost of the estimated $16 million project (for which they had already had an architect do some drawings.)  Yet, Reese denies there was ever a promise.  He said that no one knows what they are talking about and that we could meet "AND NO RECORDER", but then withdrew his offer.  I was dismissed and told to go back to my blogging and flogging.

Elaine "Blogging and Flogging" Gillen

Thoughts about last night's school board meeting

Last night's meeting was one of the shortest in quite a while, but I feel that there were comments made that should be noted.

Dan Remely is incorrect about the time needed to replace a school board director.  As with finding a replacement for James Fraasch, the process must be completed in thirty days, not two or three months as he first claimed. David Huston was correct. Another thing that bothered me when I watched the meeting this morning, the school board directors reacted inappropriately towards Mr. Huston's comments.  Personal attacks were made towards Mr. Huston, and that was uncalled for.  He was merely pointing out policy and tried to handle the situation as delicately as possible.  I see it as another example of bullying, which the school board does so well.  It is unfortunate that Director Sue Rose has been out of commission for as long as she had been, but there was no communication until last night's agenda about her status. We were due an explanation, don't you think?  And for school board directors to be insulted, was not necessary or appropriate.  The community was uninformed again.

Steve Diaz's ongoing conversation with Dale Ostergaard has been fruitful. It will be a topic of future discussion.  Thank you, Dale.  Here is another letter from Steve Diaz.

Bond restrictions?
Dale and Members of the Board:  I have been advised that the bonds you sold on behalf of the district for the "renovation" project, commencing in the Fall of 2009, may be restricted to construction and renovation purposes.  Such restrictions may now limit your options given the failure of your effort to move forward with the project as proposed.  Given this fact, what are you doing with the money in the interim?  We are certainly paying interest on it.  Are you drawing any income off the idle funds?  If you are drawing such income, is the district subject to IRS arbitrage penalties if the funds are not spent within a certain time (say, two years)?  What is the full scope of permitted uses of the proceeds?  What do you intend to do under the obligations of the bonds as issued?

If you can only spend the money on "renovation" and construction, what happens if you cannot deliver the project you promised to the public as reflected in the Act 34 Handbook and the glossy brochure you mailed out to all of us? Or, what happens, as now seems quite likely, if you cannot even commence construction before the end of October of this year?   Do you have any constraint of law or policy to revisit major changes in the scope or nature of the work with the public, or anyone else?  I realize that you, as a collective body, feel absolutely no obligation to advise the public of your plans or activities (I think one of your number put it most accurately at the public meeting when you passed the "no release of email without the author's consent" rule, saying: "If they don't know we have it, they cannot seek it under the Right to Know")---but will you tell me, now that I ask, how you plan to proceed?  The current hearings and agenda items seem a jumble of posturing and confusion, with no clear approach.  You seem just to want to build anything, to prove you did something.  It is actually amusing (but for the devastating financial and educational results) to watch your members scramble for "solutions" that entail back-tracking from everything you formerly said was "essential" to the project, and now trying to claim as your own the very criticisms of the original proposal The 4,000 put before you time and again only to be ridiculed and bullied by your undemocratic antics.  

All the while, not the board corporately, nor any individual member has stepped forward to take any measure of personal responsibility for your stewardship or oversight of the project.  For example, how about the chairman of the renovation committee, Mr. Remely, and his erstwhile side-kick, Ms. ("it's only a latte a day") Cappucci, or other board members, such as Mary Birks, who rather than listen to the public at the Act 34 hearings, first told the public that those hearings were "too late" an occasion to raise any objections (have you actually read Act 34?), before lecturing the public on why only your now discredited and failed plan was acceptable to you.  Does it occur to any member of the board that the "buck stops here"?  If the public is not to hold each of you personally responsible for your project, to whom do we turn?  Why do you think the school board is elected by the people?  The members of the board need to demonstrate the courage of their convictions, to accept the consequences of their own public acts, and to admit that "Sun Gods" they are not, nor do they enjoy a Divine Right to rule over us.  If you are responsible, you should at least be mature enough to say so, admit error and arrogance, apologize to your constituents who have placed a public trust in your hands - but whom you have failed.  

You can certainly continue to "stonewall" and hope the scandal will blow over.  You can tough it out.  Hide behind your secrecy and your bullying (and the bullies you send out to intimidate your legitimate critics).  But, you cannot face your neighbors walking through Uptown, or at the dry-cleaners or the grocery, with any assurance that behind the polite greetings, or the discrete evasion of face-to-face contact that the old admiration and support is still there. Sometimes, on the other hand, you do show symptoms of shame by avoiding contact with your local critics, as, yes, has been noted in recent select table-hopping by Ms. Cappucci and Mr. Remeley, for example.  The point is that you have not only lost respect in this community, you are dividing us and causing deep social and economic injury.  Is that why you "offered" to serve?  The best service you can do at this time for Mt. Lebanon is to show your own respect for the people who live here, who parent the students you are supposed to be educating, and who pay the bills you rack up, even when the interest we pay is for money that you leave laying around for years with no legitimate use, by taking responsibility for the taking and use of our money and the education of our children.   Your cavalier and ineffective stewardship has degraded the effectiveness of this school district and threatens our strong and proud academic tradition. You cannot substitute intrigue for policy, or bullying for leadership.

Dale, you recently asked me why only one "outsider" is running for the school board, given all that I have raised.  It is a good and telling question, the answer to which is as sad as it is obvious:  the school board has created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation in which people are afraid of what the board members and their cronies will do to harass them and their families.  It is very troubling that 4,000 people would sign an historically unprecedented petition in opposition to your center-piece policy, but then give rise to only a single candidacy at the next election for multiple directors.  You decry student bullying, as you should, but how can you not see the impact of your own bullying on the social and political life of our town?  So, the ball is in your court:  will you engage the authors of what you now concede are very practical concerns with your program, or will you continue to demonstrate hubris and arrogance beyond sufferance?  It is your decision as to how you want to engage the public and how you will comport your duty of public responsibility now that you have committed to pursue the authority of elected office.

Respectfully.  Steve Diaz

Jan Klein reported at last night's meeting, that she was having a conference call with the financial advisor this morning.  I hope the issue of IRS penalties is discussed, as well as bond restrictions.  The podcast is online at 7/11/11 School Board Discussion Meeting.

Laugh of the Day

Mt. Lebanon School District has published their draft of the Bullying Policy on the District website for Monday's meeting, February 14, 2011.
  Bullying Policy

Background

The Mt. Lebanon School District’s goal is to establish a secure school climate, conducive to teaching and student learning that is free from threat, harassment, and any type of bullying behavior. One of the District's core values calls for each member of our learning community to demonstrate respect toward others.

Bullying includes, but is not limited to, physical intimidation or assault; extortion; oral or written threats; malicious teasing, putdowns, social isolation or name calling; threatening looks, gestures, or actions; cruel rumors; and false accusations, including any of the foregoing via electronic communications such as the internet, email, text messaging, or other methods. 

Mt. Lebanon School District has published their draft of their Unlawful Harassment Policy on the District website for Monday's meeting, February 14, 2011.
  Unlawful Harassment Policy

The District also condemns and prohibits any retaliatory behavior against any complainants, witnesses or persons who participate in the investigation of a report or complaint of harassment.

So why is this the Laugh of the Day?   Read my previous posts about the SOS signs and our School Board Directors.  Granted, waking up to an SOS sign outside my window was not on school property, but this is leading by example?  What?  You say it could be kids?  Just yesterday, I posted that there were no SOS signs on my street.  I complained about the signs on Wednesday.  Why wasn't it kids when complaints were filed in the Fall due to missing VOICE signs, if that even happened?  Why were adults suspected of removing the signs then, but now, it could just be kids?

The VOICE website has this as their headline:
The High School Renovation Project Is Finally a Done Deal!

If it is a done deal, then why are we still being bullied and harassed?