Please read my original post to you again, as you seem to
have missed the point I was attempting to make & you did
not respond to my call to join us in our efforts to force
the district to adopt a DISTRICT WIDE PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT
POLICY. And yes, I am aware that all capitals means yelling.
After 5 years of advocating for the children of West County,
I do not know how to do anything else when it comes to
something SO IMPORTANT as the lack of a DISTRICT WIDE
PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT POLICY.
I do respect every
effort ANYONE makes to better our schools and would never
BELITTLE a person's attempt to get educated and make a
difference with ALL CAPS. I yell about the things that
need to be yelled about. Not TO anyone - EVER.
No where did I say that meetings were a waste of time. Hey,
I used to say that, but Charley Cowens schooled me on that thought.
think that way anymore. I would use the words WASTE OF TIME
and meeting in the same sentence
if a parent was attending a meeting while feeling PARENT GUILT
at leaving their children alone, with a sitter, without dinner,
without their homework finished to rush to a meeting. As a matter
of fact, this type of parent is almost as OUT OF TOUCH as the
disengaged parent that doesn't even bother to meet their kid's
Also in my post when you read it again you will see that
I encourage parents to join a committee if that is an area
where they have strength and can be a part of making our
schools different for our kids. Would this not be
encouraging them to go to meetings Tammy? Just like
Heres what we DONT want to do:
Encourage or belittle parents into attending meetings
where they sit there and think about Johnny or Sally
missing dinner, staying up too late or spending a
late night session at the dinner table to ensure
homework is done. This is a dishonor to parents,
and quite frankly a dishonor to the PROCESS. Who
wants a parent that has their mind somewhere else?
What kind of contribution can this parent make as
this parent is beating themselves with PARENTAL GUILT?
Not one that will stick for all kids here - thats for sure.
I look forward to your reply as it would be exciting
news to hear you will join us in forcing the school
board to adopt a DISTRICT WIDE PARENT INVOLVEMENT POLICY.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Tammera Campbell
> I am sorry that you feel that attending meetings is a waste of
time. Sometimes this is the best and fastest way to learn what is
happening and to be involved. If you can't attend meetings, then the
district has clearly provided their budget numbers on the website for
everyone to see. I suggest that you might want to read that
information, digest it and then provide your comments as to what you
need answers too.
> As for not enough money, here are some things to think about:
> 1. In 1972 Californians dedicated 5.6% of their personal income
to educate 4,377,000 children and in 2005 Californians dedicated only
4.4% of their personal income to educate 6,312,000 children
> 2. In 1980 there were 326,000 English language learners and in
2005 there are 1,550,000 English language learners requiring more
> 3. In 1980 there were 361,000 Special Ed children being taught
in public schools and in 2005 that number jumped to 683,000 with an
push for more resources
> 4. Approximately 50% of the school districts in the state of
California are in declining enrollment
> 5. Both Vallejo and Oakland had to be funded by the state and
taken over these last couple of years and there are several more
districts in California on the verge
> Alicia - I think that there is more than just the district
involved in the lack of funding. Remember the state and feds mandate
programs that they do not fully fund such as class size reduction.
> As for parent involvement I have not experienced the issues to
the extent that people have complained about. When I get to a new
school, I make it a point to be involved, get to the know the
administration, get to know the teachers and get to know the kids.
In the last few years my schools have welcomed me and when I get
resistance, I ask why. Also in the last few years I have found the
district more responsive, especially this last year. We always
scream about parent involvement, but we have to remember that there
are two sides to parent involvement. The parent has to want to be
involved. Everyone seems to point fingers at the district when in
actuality we really need to look at ourselves and ask how educated
are we on issues and how involved are we with making changes on our
campuses. There are a few of us out there doing it all, but it is a
rare few. We all know we see the same people at PTA meetings, the
same people doing the fundraising, the same people being
> involved. We can't always blame the district. And the thing that
discourages me the most is when parents don't get their way they find
blame everywhere and with everything rather than trying to find some
common ground, understand the issues, and make the changes that need
to be made. Adversarial relationships generally lead nowhere.
Interest based discussions help you form the way.
> And Alicia, I do promote parent involvement and work hard at
reaching out to the public. That is why I run the etree for Pinole
Middle and Pinole Valley High. attend city council meetings and
school board meetings when I can. If we want parent involvement, we
parents need to encourage the public to be involved.
> Tammy Campbell
> P.S. Please note that when you utilize capital letters it is a
form of yelling on the Internet. I believe that you were just trying
to emphasize your statements, but be aware that others might take it
> Alicia <ladyluvslife@> wrote:
> >>>Thanks to Greg for his most insightful and THOUGHT
> reply to my post. Greg, I will respond in length when I am feeling
> a bit better - You and your wife really are a team of WONDER
> Tammy, please do not invite me to any more meetings publically on
> this list. For a couple of reasons..........I can truly say
> BEEN THERE DONE THAT - and I have WALKED THE WALK to determine
> the area I am most effective in answering that question
> WHY DON'T OUR KIDS NEVER HAVE ENOUGH MONEY FOR WHAT THEY
> NEED IN SCHOOL.
> Sure, maybey not as long as you, Scottie, Kevin & Marsha.
> But LONG ENOUGH to know that meetings, meetings and meetings
> made me neglect my own children to figure out what was wrong
> with the school district. And THAT AINT RIGHT. You can better
> believe that there are MANY PARENTS LIKE ME.
> Most of them have
> not made the efforts I have to educate myself on the issues and
> what the REAL PICTURE IS. I would HATE to see them get the
> impression that they must neglect their own children to
> attend a bunch of meetings to be POWERFUL PARENTS. In
> fact, this is a extreme DRAIN OF POWER for the parent.
> Sure the school board meetings are important if an issue
> is before the board and maybey I could see someone wanting
> to join a committee if they have something to bring to that
> Your continued cry that people MUST attend meetings, people
> MUST go listen to the experts so you can hear from THEM how
> to make a difference is perpetuating a myth that has been
> the DOWNFALL of parental involvement in this district.
> We the parents are the FIRST EXPERTS on our kids
> Tammy take your never surrender enthusiasm and join us
> in forcing the district to adopt a PARENT INVOLVEMENT
> policy. At one time, WCCUSD's PARENT INVOLVEMENT policy
> was used as an example for district's around the STATE
> OF CALIFORNIA.
> That way, when parents do NOT get involved we CAN say that
> the district has made the efforts necessary to encourage
> involvement! That way, we CAN say the district did their
> --- In email@example.com, Tammera Campbell
> <tammeracampbell@> wrote:
> > I would like to remind everyone that the district website has a
> link to a spreadsheet that states where our parcel tax money has
> these last few years. Measure G is a renewal of this parcel tax
> one new addition, safety, hence the need for additional funding.
> Remember the district is required to put these revenues in a
> different pot and must demonstrate where the money goes. I believe
> that they have done that. We can either choose to support this
> measure or lay off teachers, counselors, librarians, coaches, site
> supervisors, police officers, etc. Our secondary schools have much
> to lose if this does not pass.
> > I would like to extend an invitation to Alicia to join us at the
> budget advisory meetings so she can get a real close look at the
> money and pose her questions there so clear answers can be
> I believe Alicia you might find our meetings interesting. And may I
> also point out the MGT audit, have you read it? There have been
> independent and state audits over the years that have certified and
> supported the district. I know that there is much more work to be
> done, but I feel in my 22+ years volunteering in my schools, I have
> seen a different district this last year.
> > Alicia with regards to endorsements, I don't think anyone is
> trying to hide anything. We all know who held what office when.
> Their names are on the flyers because their names are well known. I
> am an active parent and yes I have a vested interested in how the
> district runs and how it will survive. My interests include my
> youngest son Devin, who will be a sophomore at PVHS next year, all
> the kids who attend WCCUSD schools because they deserve and
> education, all our employees because they serve and need their
> and finally the value of my home.
> > Alicia I should also point out that there haven't been fulltime
> librarians in the elementary schools since the state takeover. We
> even lost librarians for a few years when my boys were in
> school. Now we have part time librarians, but when you have so many
> small elementary schools it would be hard to completely fund every
> school full time. There are librarians at the secondary level
> though. Remember Measure G does not cover all the full expenses of
> the designated items, but supplements what is already in our budget
> so we can provide more.
> > I whole heartedly endorse Measure G because everyone will lose if
> it does not pass.
> > Tammy Campbell
> > gregorychang <gregorychang@> wrote:
> > Dear Alicia, thanks for sharing your views on this subject. As a
> > relative newcomer to WCCUSD, it is helpful and interesting to
> > contrary viewpoints. It helps us get more educated about these
> > I have been in favor of Measure G, partially out of self interest
> > because I have two young children and I think class size
> > for K-3 is something they will really benefit from, along with a
> > of other children.
> > I'm also partial to anything to do with sports and libraries (my
> > was a school librarian) so I support additional funding for that.
> > In the bigger picture, it's my belief that we in California do
> > spend enough money on public education. Someone mentioned that we
> > 49th out of 50 states in terms of education spending. I dont know
> > that is true or not, but our spending priorities do seem out of
> > in the great nation-state of California. (SF Chron reported over
> > weekend that overtime wages for correctional officers and prison
> > medical personnel is $500 million this year alone. Maybe more
> > resources would help prevent the need for expanded prisons by
> > kids an opportunity to avoid that path?)
> > Hearing your viewpoint is helpful to challenge my own
> > fact, if possible, I would like to hear more specifics about why
> > oppose Measure G. I did find it refreshing that your post did not
> > contain any knee-jerk reaction against more taxes simply out of a
> > hatred of additional taxes. Not all taxes are created equal!
> > One point you raise is the concern about lack of fiscal
> > responsibility. You do seem to argue that giving the school
> > more money will only lead to more waste, inefficiencies and
> > corruption, which one must admit is a distinct possibility. Yet
> > alternative will be a cut in services which is not something I
> > to live with either. I am also concerned about fiscal
> > and yet support additional services for the kids. Are these goals
> > mutually exclusive? I guess it will depend on the honesty and
> > competence of our leaders. Have they earned our trust and do they
> > deserve our faith? This is a question we must wrestle with.
> > The other point you bring up is that the campaign in favor of
> > G is misleading. You say that elementary libraries are still
> > understaffed and usually open only one day a week depending on
> > volunteers. While I agree that the district could provide more
> > specifics on how the money is spent, the breakdown they do
> > informative. It clearly states that there is funding for six full
> > time elementary librarians. So six is not enough to go around the
> > entire district, which must have dozens of elementary schools. It
> > clear that elementary schools that will not get a fulltime
> > A bigger question I have is whether some schools are getting more
> > district-funded library services than others?
> > If you are right that the resources are shared fairly in a way
> > each school gets a professional librarian one day a week, the way
> > see it, one day a week is better than nothing. I am not sure if
> > true that each elementary gets one day a week, though. Assuming
> > librarians, that would mean 30 schools get served every week.
> > anyone know if this is accurate? This is a good example of where
> > supporters of Measure G could use more detailed information.
> > Also, what about middle school and high school libraries? Are
> > open every day thanks to the parcel tax? It lists funding for six
> > librarians at both the middle school and high school level so it
> > would seem to be enough to keep them open on a daily basis.
> > So I acknowledge and agree with you that there are some missing
> > details. But I am not convinced that is a good enough reason to
> > oppose the measure.
> > Your other key point is that the campaign in support of measure G
> > misleading because it doesnt list the previous affiliation of
> > the people who have endorsed the measure, such as former school
> > members. I noticed that the former Richmond mayor is also listed
> > without her former designation.
> > I will leave it to the campaign managers to discuss why they
> > to leave off prior designations -- are they really trying to
> > the voters? Again, I dont see that as a big enough reason to vote
> > against this program.
> > From what I have heard, some people are against measure G because
> > they are fed up with fiscal mismanagement on the part of WCCUSD
> > certainly doesnt have the best track record. The concern I would
> > is that cutting off the funds will ultimately hurt the children
> > rather than teaching WCCUSD any specific lessons about how to
> > finances in a more effective way.
> > For me, it may come down to this: Will turning down measure G
> > in a better or worse school district with more or less
> > for the children?
> > ---------------------------------
> > Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with
> Yahoo! FareChase.
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone
> Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
--- End forwarded message ---