June 3rd "special" board retreat

The June 3rd board meeting has been posted on BoardDocs. The agenda is extremely slim so I asked for some clarifying details:

I see that the agenda for the June 3rd retreat has been posted. The agenda is rather bare, showing only two items for Open Session (other than comments), both of which are HR Ken Kleber items. But no extra information is provided whatsoever. I am curious, what is the Administrative appointment and the reclassification?
Also, from talking to Board Members who have attended “retreats” in the past, I am aware that usually a lot of awesome things happen and/or are discussed at retreats. Is the bulk of the June 3rd meeting going to be held in closed (executive) session? If so, why? If not, I am curious what else is being planned?
Also, I noted that various reasons for Executive Session are being highlighted on BoardDocs – please pass along my thanks to whomever made that decision, I appreciate it.


Dr. Wiegand responded:

The administrative appointments will be for the Interim Principal at Garden Hills and the Administrator for the Alternative to Suspension Program.

The retreat on Monday will be facilitated by the Illinois Association of School Board representative, Patrick Rice.  Since it involves self-evaluation it takes place in Executive Session.  I do plan on holding on a Board/Admin Retreat later in June (date not yet secured) similar to what we did in the past, and this will be in open session to discuss goals for the 13-14 school year, along with our work on how to become a more student and family centered organization.


Having been to a a couple of the board retreats (the public ones), I encourage the public to pay attention and perhaps even participate if possible.


As to the Garden Hills Interim Principal, I have heard from a couple parents and I encourage them (you) to make your comments public as you see fit.

News-Gazette article about the Board

re: http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2013-05-31/board-officers-vote-may-have-had-outside-influence.html

Also, the results of the FOIA: http://www.news-gazette.com/sites/all/files/pdf/2013/05/30/FOIA_request.pdf

Text searchable version (has errors due to conversion): https://thecitizen4blog.wordpress.com/misc/may-31st-ng-foia-request-pdf-converted-to-text/

This is one of the rumors I hinted at earlier. I have a number of issues with this, but I fear I have not fully gelled my thoughts coherently, yet. So, in a sense, right now I am merely hopping on the news bandwagon since a number of readers already alerted me to the article – figure I might as well at least say something about it.

From my own personal conversations with those involved, I know there is more going on than what is being said publicly. What I struggle with is “what is really important here?” I mean, I can see folks getting all worked up about “he said she said” kinda thing. But what do we want to fall out from this? Of course, everyone is going to always be wondering who this mystery 3rd party is, what their motives are, etc etc. Does it really matter? Does it really have to be a big bad secret? What about all this talk of transparency? Or is transparency only to be applied when conveinent?

I don’t know all the answers. I am still chewing on this myself.

Read the emails. Form your own opinion.

PS – I am going to convert the FOIA pdf to searchable text. (now done)