Friday, March 20, 2015

Comments of the Day -- Bullying and Endorsements....

Thursday's themes were all about bullying and endorsements.  What is bullying and have the bloggers, D181 administrators, D181 BOE members, spouses of D181 candidates or others been actively engaged in bullying?  Who did the Hinsdalean endorse and does anyone really care? Two comments stood out and we are posting them below as our comments of the day.  As always, SOUND OFF!


Anonymous said...
4:32, just because you don't agree with me, I have a hard time understanding how a nice person like you feels so comfortable throwing out insults like "Use your comprehension skills!" That is just rude. And vitriolic. But let's make this clear - NO ONE thinks BULLY is a bad word. It is NOT a bad word. That is why schools and teachers use it each and every time they talk about bullies. That is why there are BOOKS about bullying in our elementary school libraries, and that is why Mr. McCurry used the word himself multiple times in previous paragraphs. Teachers never refer to it as the B WORD! For goodness sake is right! Yes bullies are BAD, but no one, not a 5 year old or a 50 year old says B word instead of the word BULLY! And if he really thinks that, then he is more out of touch with reality than I thought.

But just to humour you, let's just say that your incorrect understanding of the B word was correct. Wouldn't it also be somewhat BULLYISH to even call another child a BULLY? Or even a B? It isn't nice to call or label anyone in a negative way, especially a chilld. EVER. The point is: Mr. McCurry is a hypocrite. People shouldn't go around criticizing others on a blog OR a newspaper OR in person and think that bullying is only possible when it is on the internet! It is still bullying if it happens in a phone call, in person, with or without your name attached. It is still bullying if it happens at a board of education meeting, on the playground or in a fraternity. Look at what happened in D86 the other day when Manley berated a high schooler for starting a petition because she was offended by it! The petition was not respectful to Ms. Manley, but from what I understand, Ms. Manley has a long history of not showing respect. That's why everyone wants her to resign! Manley doesn't give respect to anyone else, yet somehow expect it from everyone! Skoda's group feels that they are the only ones who are EVER right. They refuse to see the point of views of others. Ms. Manley was so frightened of a child exercising her freedom of speech, that she started to berate her. Just like Mr. McCurry attacks the blog. Will Ms. Manley ever agree with the high schooler? Probably not. But that girl still has every right to pass out flyers or start a petition. And the blog has every right to exist.  

Like the Skoda crew, Amy McCurry believes that she and her ideas are above reproach, evidence and policies. That only a few deserve power over what is occuirng in our children's schools. They feel it's acceptable to berate, dismiss, or ignore others, but God Forbid someone else criticize THEM. That's just not ok. Bullying doesn't just happen at D86 meetings. It has been happening over and over at D181 meetings for for years now. It doesn't JUST happen on anonymous internet sites. It happens to teachers from Adminisitrators, principals to teachers, parents to teachers, and bosses to employees. It comes about when one person refuses to accept the FACT that in America, having a differing opinion is legal. Especially when it concerns your own child's public education. We don't have to agree with the people who run our public schools. They are not private! Parents need to speak up. People who do speak up are taking the time to GO to meetings and participate. They are LEARNING about the issues and concerns that are facing our kids. Just like the the McCurrys, these parents also deserve respect.

Criticism part of life, especially if you choose to put yourself in the public eye. Have you ever read Angie's List? A product review on Sears or Nordstorms? For your doctor? If you haven't, I am not sure where you have been. When my childrens educations are being led in uncharted, unsupported territory with my own tax dollars, you better bet I will speak up. And if the way I want to do it is through a public blog that gives access to EVERYONE, what is wrong with that? That is better than the secretive D181 administration does! Sure, I could post on The Wives of Hinsdale website or go laugh at the Commity House's spoof on our town, but I just think my time would be better spent posting on a blog that concerns itself with my child's education. What's wrong with that? If you don't like it, don't do it. And if I want to criticize an article that a candidate's husband writes in the paper, I can. That's my right. Just as it is yours to criticize what I write on this blog. But get over yourself. If you don't like what is on this blog, go start your own blog. But let's face it, you would be too narrow minded to ever post anything that you didn't agree with. Just like a bully.
Well Ms. Gray is not about the image. She is about the substance and one of the most qualified running for the board. Ms. Gray knows what the issues are. And guess what, so does Pam Lannom. But she’s about selling the image and not the truth.

I’m smart enough to vote for candidates who are qualified to actually DO the job and will not just pretend. The pretenders are all about perpetuating the idealistic view of Hinsdale. And this town can’t be propped forever on an image. Maybe the district used to be great. But from my vantage point, it’s not looking so rosy anymore. We have serious issues and need serious people to represent the community. If you’re new to this blog or if you have questions about what’s going on in this district, start reading right here. Learn what the issues truly are. I can promise you that you will not find them in the Hinsdalean.

I will be voting for Gray, Burns, Giltner, and Czerwiec.


Anonymous said...

Comment 2 is right. D181 isn't Mayberry anymore. And I ain't a bully for speakin' the truth!

Anonymous said...

I was alerted to this blog by an acquaintance, who told me it would keep me better informed about D181. Rather, the bloggers/commenters served only to inform me about People This Blog Hates. The level of (largely intellectual, but also economic) snobbery is impressive here, and I am a lifelong Hinsdalean. To an Outsider (that is, one who does not, for example, think our village is on the verge of ruin because of the endorsement in a free local paper of a school board candidate who does not share your views), this blog is a mix of scary and amusing.
The endless “Daily Reasons Why Marty Turek Should Not Be Re-Elected” verge on the sophomoric. Those with whom you agree are practically deified (Leslie Gray, whom I soon expect to see walking on water) and those you dislike are at best back-handedly insulted (repeatedly saying of Amy McCurry that “she seems like a nice person” is wildly patronizing), or at worst, they are slandered (saying Pam Lannom is a shill and a toadie). Why, for example, do you describe Don White’s former district as “the cornfields of Plainfield” if not to belittle his accomplishments as occurring somewhere vaguely rustic and untutored?
I admit, I was delighted by the Hinsdalean’s endorsement of Amy McCurry, solely because I knew it would make the blog go apoplectic, and you did not disappoint! The entertainment value here is dulled only by the realization that everyone here is dead serious. Finally, please stop referring to those whose opinions differ from yours as having “drunk the Kool-Aid,” which is a reference to a tragic mass suicide and murder, which I sincerely hope was not your intent.

Anonymous said...

12:08 Haha! I can't stop laughing. You're a riot. Have you ever thought about doing standup?

Anonymous said...

12:08, now that you've given us your opinion on the blog and some of its posters, what is your opinion on the current state of affairs in D181? THe various components of The Learning For All Plan - including, elimination of tiers at the middle school, acceleration and compacting for all, lowered identification standards for advanced/accelerated classes in the middle schools, integrated classrooms? Those are the issues and concerns that most of us are here for and post about. Instead of your insulting and highly hypocritical post, practice what you preach and contribute to the discussion in a productive and non-insulting manner.

Referring to parents who post as sophmoric, scary and amusing does nothing to convince other readers that you are sincere in your desire to be better informed about D181 and certainly makes you no better than those you seek to denigrate.

Anonymous said...

Dear 12:08,

Welcome to the blog.

I agree with your comments about Ad Hominem's, I don't like them.

What is sad to me is that you disparage non-substantive comments, which is good, but you then dismiss well-reasoned, intelligent comments as "intellectual snobbery" without any specifics. That puts you in the camp of the people who you disparage.

Please post more, and make a substantive argument. Why choose not to address any of the endless list of substantive arguments on this site?

Where are the substantive arguments against ending L4A and social justice? Why is it so wrong to expect the "raise the floor and raise the ceiling" results that were promised? Why is it so funny to you that our student performance is sliding versus peers and all we get are excuses?

The blog is one-sided because people like you have no substantive counter argument; you are probably just a trusting person. When the administration says you don't need to know what is in the soylent green, you say okay.

There are many posts begging for people to make a substantive argument for the opposing side. Instead, there is only silence. They have no argument beyond trust, faith, belief, and hope. Those are just feelings, not reasoned views.

Why do people like you think the schools are fine? Because they always have been in the past. Future = Past.

Why do you comment only on side-show issues? Probably because you are largely uninformed and have no children whose education is at risk in this sliding district.

It is sad to me that in spite of the fact that you want unknowledgeable candidate to be endorsed to upset some of the posters on this blog. The only thing that should matter about the candidates is how they are going to work to make the school better for the students and community it serves. However, you do not mention that at all. Instead, you sound like this blog is only for entertainment value.

Please consider the children in your community. Consider the substantive arguments being made here, educate yourself, and please, please, post any substantive disagreements. We are in desperate need of anyone who can make an educated argument for supporting the administrations deadly one, two punch of non-substantive edu-speak presentations, and failure to deliver promised results.

Unfortunately, it appears that there is virtually no defense for what they are doing, and why they avoid substantive responses, so the arguments are one-sided so far. Perhaps you can be the one to change that.

I look forward to hearing from you. :)

A British Tar said...

12:08, I totally agree with you. Some people on this blog are totally vitriolic, as 12:17 excellently demonstrates. These people complain that the board & administration are rude to people, yet do the exact same thing. Pot, meet kettle.

You are also correct that it's both scary and amusing, kind of like a car accident that you can't turn away from. Sometimes, I just want to grab some popcorn and watch the drama unfold.

All I ask is that my fellow posters keep things respectful. I don't mind that if you disagree, but do it respectfully. Thank you.

Anonymous said...

12:08 glad you get entertainment from reading parent and community member concerns/insights/opinions. Being a lifelong Hinsdalean seems to give some people a passport to talk down to other community members. Not sure if you have kids in the district anymore but really doesn't matter. Your whole demeanor was disrespectful when you are asking for respect. I was expecting Amy Mccurry to start singing the songs from the sound of music since she is such a nice person and another lifelong Hinsdalean. Wow Pam Lannom is a shill and toadie. I missed that post. She does provide opinionated biased reporting sometimes almost leading people to believe that she represents the district. It is her right since she co-owns the paper. I have a right as a consumer to read it or toss it. I also don't really think that you care about the kool aid drinkers. It's just a way to end your comical summation in the hopes of shutting down commentary just like you see happen at school board meetings. We are happy to pretend you have the best administrators on staff and what the heck lets levy for the max, pay higher salaries and ask the community for more and more money. If only we lived in a bubble and you truly understood how exclusive you sound. Hinsdale is not the Mayberry people like to believe. You are included if you act and pretend that everything is ok or go along with the group think. It's okay to be passionate about sports but not about the education of your children. Appearances are better than reality. Got it. Folks it appears that we have a great high school district (don't take my word for it, look at the rankings) and it really doesn't matter who is on the board or in the administrative department as long as our teachers continue to deliver and our kids are able to graduate and go to any college. No need to be concerned about teacher strikes. It would never happen. Don't let anyone scare you into thinking these are truly realities. After all Dr. Skoda is also a lifelong learner, an ex-teacher. Cheers.

Anonymous said...

12:08 , yours is a perfect example of a pointless, mean post. You call the comments of others sophomoric, yet you say:

I admit, I was delighted by the Hinsdalean’s endorsement of Amy McCurry, solely because I knew it would make the blog go apoplectic, and you did not disappoint!

How sad that you take pleasure in reading the valid concerns of others. That the only thing you could appreciate from reading differing views and thoughts of parents, teachers like Jill Q., and board candidates like John Czerwiec was the entertainment value. Even the people who criticize this blog add more value than someone like you, who simply reads for amusement.

The fact that you said you are "delighted" by the distress of others, regardless of the ramifications to our schools and our children, tells me you've got even bigger problems than d181 does. Unlike you, however, I doubt that most people who read or post on this blog would find amusement in reading about the issues that seriously concern you.

A British Tar said...

In regards to 12:08's post, I find it and most, if not all, posts referring to it somewhat repulsive. Many of you complain about 12:08 being rude, and I agree, yet many of you are rude as well. I don't mind different opinions as long as you pose them respectfully.

However, I hate to admit it, I agree with 12:08 in that it is both scary and somewhat amusing to read the comments. Not so much the issues facing the district, but people's response to it. It's like a car wreck that you can't look away from. I sometimes want to get some popcorn and watch the drama unfold. I apologize if that view offends any of you, but I feel I just have to take a step back and just watch.

I have just one request: if I ever offend any of you, please let me know in a courteous manner and let me know how I can change so my actions aren't offensive. I sincerely hope that's not too much to ask. Thank you.

D181 Employee said...

I recently got an e-mail from Bridget McGuigan saying that Hinsdale Central just had a shelter-in-place incident today. Can anyone provide any details? While I don't have children who attend there, I have some friends who work there so I'm a little concerned. Thanks in advance!

Anonymous said...

I read my Hinsdalean with interest and also read today's comments on the blog. It seems people are talking from both sides of their mouths. The hinsdalean thinks advisory referendums are bad since board members should make these decisions which implies we need board members who understand the issues and are willing to step up to the plate and push for accountability on behalf of the community, be fiscally responsible etc. Why are the issues at D86 more important than D181? Is it more important that the board pretend everything is okay and the district is in exceptional shape even though recent months have shown poor planning and budgeting as well as a complete lack of consistency with the learning plan? Don't forget the complete ignorance of facility issues at HMS by Dr. Schuster prior to the pipe bursting. I can only imagine the plight of the staff and students in that building if the pipe had not burst. I'm wondering whether we should believe all of the negative press about D86 if this blog is too negative? I agree some of the information being passed around is a little over the top. A lot of sensationalism in emails, "STOP THE PRESSES – A NEW THEORY ON WHO MAY HAVE KILLED JFK! AND JUST WHO IS BOB BLAND?". Lots of negative press for skoda, etc. and lots of +ve for the D86 P-C-H slate. However aren't these the type of people we want on the D181 board?

If I'm expected to trust any Tom, Dick or Mary on the D181 school board, I should probably have the same faith in the D86 board. Skoda is seeking a 5th term - talk about continuity. There are obviously people on both sides of the fence with one side being louder and having a bigger presence right now. If we had board members who could be trusted to make the best decisions for all students, tax payers and teachers, maybe this blog and groups such as those in D86 would not need to exist. Hoping for sanity in both districts which does not mean appearances are all that matter.

The Parents said...

2:41: unfortunately we have no specific info on the HCHS lockdown, but we believe it has ended without incident.

Anonymous said...

Dear 12:08,

You forgot, "ugly, lazy, and disrespectful."

The annals of history are replete with sophomoric, though useful, social commentary. Therefore, your characterization of the "Daily Reason" doesn't strike me as counter to its purpose.

Your screed, however, lacks ANY substantive argument. In fact, you fail to even claim that the "Daily Reason" feature has ever been inaccurate or invalid.

Anyone can call us names. It's much harder to put your big-boy pants on and engage in meaningful public discourse about the issues facing the district.

Write back when you think you're up to the task.

The Parents said...

We have received a comment promoting the D86 Skoda slate. Under no circumstances will we publish such rubbish! We, the bloggers support Planson, Hirsman and Carpenter!

Anonymous said...


I understand that you don't like Ad Hominem attacks, but honestly your post is either a shallow, sad, and insincere attempt to distract people from important and substantive issues, or you are just ignorant.

How can you enjoy watching children being harmed?

How can you pleasure yourself by reading the frustrations of parents whose childrens' performance is lagging? Why is that funny?

Why is it enjoyable to see the pathetic and ongoing double speak from administrators who are unable to give a clear yes or no answer to even the simplest of questions? Have you actually been to any of these BOE meetings? If you have been it is obvious.

Why is it funny that the administration persists in using students as guinea pigs for social justice and fadish, but unproven approaches like L4A.

What happened to the priority of giving our kids the best education possible? To me that is the only acceptable objective.

Oddly, while failing children and exasperated parents are funny to you, you are concerned about the expression "drink the kool-aid" which is a common figure of speech in this country. To me, that just highlights the insincerity or ignorance of your post. I am not sure which.

Please consider focusing on substance, and consider the fact that the most highly educated and informed parents in this village are the ones who are the most concerned. That should tell you something important.

If you are not really a sociopath who takes pleasure in the pain of others, but someone who cares for the other people in this community and the children of this community, please consider educating yourself and then you will understand that what is happening is not funny at all.

Anonymous said...

Dear The Parents,

Please publish the Skoda supporter post. I think that the best way do deal with speech you disagree with is to allow it to be heard. Then everyone will see it for what it is!

Plus, some of us will enjoy responding to it.

A British Tar said...

Parents: I am shocked and somewhat disgusted that you would not post the comment about the Skoda slate. If it's not overly offensive (profanity, slandering, etc.), I think we have a right to know other people's opinions. Your address is "". Please, be accountable yourselves. you may see it as "rubbish," and I admit, I don't like the Skoda slate either, but I like hearing different, yet respectful, opinions. It helps me see all sides of a situation and grow as a person. Thank you.

The Parents said...

3:25 and British Tar: We have elected not to publish Skoda campaign material. Sorry. After the way a Hinsdale South Student was harassed last week by Ms. Manley when she attempted to distribute campaign material for Planson, Hirsman and Carpenter outside of the school, and then the disgusting names that Skoda's Campaign Manager, Bob Bland, has called the student in comments he has made on the local press stories regarding this incident, we refuse to give Mr. Bland's campaign links or propaganda any credibility or free publicity. We don't sell ad space on this blog. If Skoda/Bland/Cappetta/Gershunny have to pay to run their ads elsewhere, why would we even consider giving them a free outlet to spew their positions, positions that we don't agree with. You can be "disgusted" with us for not wanting to promote the Skoda slate or give them a free forum, and that is certainly your right, but we are standing firm on this decision.

The Parents said...

12:08: There is not much more we can add to the responsive comments we have published to your comment attacking the blog. You, as all others, are welcome to your opinions. But here's the challenge we'd like you to consider. Time and again, we have invited people to opine why Mr. Turek should be reelected and asked for the reasons to go beyond simply stating "for the sake of continuity." NO ONE, let us repeat, NO ONE has submitted any reasons. Perhaps you'd like to, but in so doing, please don't just skim the 22 reasons we have posted so far why he shouldn't be reelected. We were sort of (not really) "hurt" that you found them to be sophomoric. Actually, we were dismayed that someone who writes so eloquently has actually poo-poo'd these reasons. Were you at any of the school meetings where some of the incidents described in the list took place? Have you, in fact, attended a D181 BOE meeting in the last two years, since Mr. Turek has served as president? If you have not, then it's not too late for you to do some homework. Start listening to the podcasts that are available on the D181 website. Better settle into a comfy chair to do it, though, since it will take you hours and hours. But that's what we, the bloggers, and many of the commentors, have been doing for years now. We either have attended the meetings in person, listened to the live-stream or listened after the fact to the podcasts. We have not just made this stuff up. So, we invite you to spend more time than perhaps you have already taken in reading parts of this blog, and school yourself up on the facts -- actual audios of meetings. Then come back to us and please answer or address the substantive questions and concerns that the commenters have asked you.

A British Tar said...

Thank you, Parents for explaining your reasons. You have regained much of the respect you had lost. If I may respectfully request something: your 3:39 post is very respectful and eloquent while your 2:55 is somewhat disrespectful since you simply call the pro-Skoda post "rubbish" without giving reasons. If you could post more like your 3:339 and less like your 2:55, I would greatly appreciate it. This goes to all other posters as well. Thank you.

Like I said, I am no fan of Skoda. Anyone who runs with him starts at a disadvantage in terms of my respect. Skoda has been very rude towards teachers, staff, students and community members, along with fellow board members. Here is an example:

Plus, he and his slate decided to not go to the candidate forum and instead go to a $30/plate fundraiser. While it's possible he planned the fundraiser ahead of when he found out the date of the candidate forum, I find this unlikely.

The last argument against Skoda that I'll post for now is how he and the rest of his slate (and, yes, it is HIS slate) chose to interview for the Hinsdalean questionnaire collectively, rather than individually like the others. This seems to me that the other two candidates will be no more than Skoda's puppets and do whatever he says. If they all came to their own conclusions individually, and just happened to agree with Skoda, I wouldn't mind as much. However, it seems to me that's not the case.

For those reasons, I agree that the 2+3=5 slate is a better choice.

Anonymous said...

I usually prefer for everyone to be heard, but I have to say I support The Parents and would not publish a Skoda supporters comment either, given that he and his cronies were not interested in participating in a fair and open debate, that he and his cronies have no children in the district, and that his support comes primarily from outside the district. These people are only interested in running a tax cutting experiment on someone else's district: ours!

Why don't they want to risk the education of their own kids? I think that is obvious. Why should they when they can use your kids to experiment on instead.

Anonymous said...

Hiya, folks! This is 12:08 here. Forgive me for using humor to make a point on this serious-minded blog. I apologize for the feathers I ruffled. I purposely did not engage in any substantive issues, as the point of my post was to point out that, to potential newcomers like me, most commenters on this blog appear, well, let’s just say a little over the top. Incidentally, I never said I dislike ad hominem arguments; I rather enjoy them. But then again, I am not holding myself out to be an educational guide for others. I merely wanted to know more about what was going on in D181 and came to this site. With respect to my being delighted about the Hinsdalean’s endorsement: ok, I’m sorry, it *was* pretty funny. I opened my paper, read the endorsement and said to myself “Now I gotta see how the blog people all go nuts.” Oh, and since someone just mentioned the Turek Reasons bit: I actually do not intend to vote for him, but the constant posting of Reasons gets pretty irksome (and “sophomoric” has such a nice, educational undertone to it). I wish you all the best; you all obviously care very much. I can only aspire to this level of educational diligence. In the meantime, I’ll just lurk. But seriously, maybe try to lighten up just a little, people?

Anonymous said...

British Tar: Thanks for your last comment and the link you shared. Here's another one, in case you haven't seen it:

Anonymous said...

Comments about all posters which have included teachers at times as being car wrecks, dramatic and rude do sound disrespectful. You could make comments like you just did. Agree about keeping over the top negative comments out. Lets be reasonable unlike 12:08. I'm sure Pam doesn't appreciate being labeled a shill and a toadie even in jest. No need to insult sophomores to make your point either.

Anonymous said...

Let's keep in mind that whomever does get on the Board, they will be overseen by taxpayers by their questioning, preparedness and overall responsibility to be very well versed on all issues of public finance, educational metrics and fiduciary leadership. It will ALL be on the record !! Just a reminder that this is NOT a popularity contest and all elected officials probably wish they had more hindsight IQ going in. Just something to keep in mind. For the candidates that I have personally spoken to, since they have really kept up on the issues on a DAILY basis (which it is), they are ready and know precisely that which is inevitably coming. The high real estate prices and taxes in D 181 should correlate to excellence and expertise on all levels, otherwise the ROI for all of us is absent. We don't just require teaching and administrative excellence but a well versed Board who can drill down to the high level macro and micro issues that this district is facing. It is a serious public obligation for whomever is seated and ALL performance will be the public record to analyse......for all current residents and potential residents. Vote accordingly !

Anonymous said...

Yesterday's posts by 12:08 and Catherine Johnson are very discouraging to me.

These two people seem to be modestly intelligent to me, but still appear to be unable to discern from what is written on this blog and other sources that there is a serious issues in d181.

They post for amusement, or to kibitz about the anonymity of the blog, but they are utterly incapable or unwilling to discern or focus on what actually matters here: what is happening to the kids education. I find this incredibly discouraging. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

This election that is a simple choice. On one side are Gray, Burns, Giltner, and Czerwiec. They are critical thinkers who represent science, reason, evidence, accountability and transparency in decision making.

In stark contrast, are Turek and McCurry. They represent magical thinking, blind faith in the current administration with no expectation of making decisions-based on evidence or establishing objectives and accountability. They see hope and optimism as a strategy, and avoid asking Dr. Schneider and Dr. White for specifics because they think it is rude. They are willing to bet all of our childrens' futures on that faith in a couple of inexperienced educators with no track record of success in a district like 181 who are running an untried experiment. Turk and McCurry, will not acknowledge failure or responsibility no matter how bad the student's results are, they will make excuses and claim that if not for them and the administration, it would have been worse. Results are already deteriorating compared to other districts, and the rationalization has already begun. Furthermore, Mr. Turek admits that this current approach is not challenging for top student and that he has no plans to change that for years.

The point is that if 12:08 and Catherine Johnson can read the blog and yet, fail completely to discern the issue and clear choice here, then I am afraid that that our efforts are failing.

It seems that district residents, even relatively intelligent ones, are simply in denial. Apparently, and it is not worth their time to investigate the substance of the issue and have a position or even to ask an intelligent question about any issue of substance. They are only interested in commenting about the largely superfluous.

What has to happen to get people to understand what is going on here?

Anonymous said...

5:14 unfortunately it seems that what has to happen is that people's children need to be directly and negatively impacted for several months and then usually be tipped off by another "in the know" parent, before they speak up - a la Investigations, Agile Mind, current 5th grade class issues, differentiation specialist disparity, etc.... At that point, however, damage has already been done and resources wasted. By the time the ship is righted, half a year of precious instruction time is lost. Younger parents simply don't know what to look for and parents with older kids are often too busy to be involved proactively. Our BOE is supposed to be the oversight on these issues but the majority has chosen to take a wait and see approach for 3 years.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Law attempts to ban First Amendment rights

Statement from the Office of the Superintendent

Effective immediately, Superintendent Dr. Bruce Law has announced the following rules for outside groups or individuals when on District property.

In the absence of a Board policy that explicitly states the parameters for outside groups engaging in political or other activities on District property, groups or individuals wanting to exercise their First Amendment rights to free speech expect these rights to be constitutionally protected. After discussing with legal counsel the events that have occurred since March 12, we believe that the District can reasonably forecast a substantial disruption on District property as a result of the number of groups and individuals who have requested to distribute materials on our property or have simply shown up and already distributed materials without prior notice. To control these activities until the Board determines its official stance through policy, I am imposing the following time, place and manner restrictions on the distribution of literature or other material on our property.

1. No outside individuals or groups will be allowed to distribute literature, demonstrate or engage in non-school related activities on our property during arrival or dismissal times out of concern for students’ safety in attempting to enter or leave the school.

2. No outside individuals or groups or students will be allowed to distribute literature, demonstrate or engage in non-school related activities on our property while people are arriving or leaving Board meetings or District evening activities.

Individuals or groups with questions should contact Superintendent Dr. Bruce Law at (630) 655-6100.

The first item may possibly be reasonable, but I can't believe that the second item has any legal standing at all. I don't believe that Dr. Law has the right to prevent people from distributing literature or demonstrating outside the board meeting.

To me, this sounds like Dr. Law is now actively trying to manipulate the election for Mr. Skoda and co. by banning first amendment rights. That is the most blatant election manipulation I have seen so far.

What gives him authority to override the Constitution of the United States? Attorneys, please weigh in!

Anonymous said...

I don't think Dr. Law is trying to step on anyone's first amendment rights. I think he is trying to maintain a calm atmosphere around his schools. A couple of days after the incident at Hinsdale South, my son came home from Central with a pro-life brochure that he received just outside of the door at school, on school grounds. It was distributed by an adult, and has nothing to do with school or education. I truly believe Dr. Law is simply attempting to keep things under control, and quite frankly, after Friday's incident, I would prefer to not have strangers around the building if they have no reason to be there.

Anonymous said...

"I don't think Dr. Law is trying to step on anyone's first amendment rights. I think he is trying to maintain a calm atmosphere around his schools."

1. It does not matter what his intention is, he is violating the first amendment rights of citizens.

2. It appears to me that this is a gross abuse of authority and that he is using his influence to impact the election. He knows that if the parents get informed and angry Skoda and his cronies will be thrown out. I appears that he is working to prevent parents from being informed. By what authority does he ban peaceful distribution of materials and lawful demonstration on public property?

He appears to now be choosing sides in a desperate attempt to save his beloved Dr. Skroda, he appears to be willing to invoke pretend authority to override the constitution.

Why are these things allowed in Ferguson? Because they are the rights of citizens. No President, or Governor, has the right to prevent peaceful demonstrations. However, apparently Dr. Law does, in an effort to impact the election.

If someone gets violent or breaks the law you can take them to jail, but you can't block free speech even if it is speech you don't agree with. That is what free speech means. That is why the Westborough Baptist church is able to protest so annoyingly. It is a protected right.

I think that he knows that this will not hold up in court. He is just trying to support Dr. Skoda's reelection by falsely banning the constitution on his own authority.

Dr. Law, that is shameful. You should resign immediately.

Anonymous said...

It certainly does appear as if suddenly Dr. Law is kowtowing to Ms. Manley and banning distribution of campaign materials that he said was fine just last week.

It is sad to see him playing lackey and doing the bidding of Manley and Skoda and transparently acting to block parents from learning the truth and working to manipulate the election. Is that legal? When is his contract up? It does not seem like good decision making to usurp first amendment rights of citizens right before Skoda gets tossed out.

Well, he has made his bed. Maybe Dr. law, Skoda, and Manley can find some other district to harass together, and leave us alone.