The issue of Michael Alves' unannounced private meeting with the new Democratic members of the Wake County school board won't seem to go away.
The issue was revisited with some heated comments during Tuesday's board meeting. The discussion, more of which is detailed later in the post, shows the continuing wariness between the Republican and Democratic members.
More recently, Terry Stoops, director of education studies for the conservative John Locke Foundation, brought up the issue in a Thursday blog post.
Stoops said the Greater Raleigh of Commerce and the Wake Education Partnership, the groups that sponsored the meeting, deserve some of the blame for what happened.
"Why should the Greater Raleigh Chamber of Commerce and the Wake Education Partnership get a pass?" Stoops writes. "If you excuse the enablers, you excuse the behavior.
So, I am calling on Harvey Schmitt of the GRCC and Steve Parrott of the WEP to issue a joint apology to the taxpayers of Wake County. We’re waiting."
Now returning to Tuesday's meeting, the issue came up again when Republican board member Debra Goldman, the main critic of the Dec. 7 meeting, asked about having learned that the school system will be paying to use Alves' software.
Superintendent Tony Tata said the Chamber had been paying Alves but the school system would now be doing so.
Chief Business Officer David Neter said the district used Alves' proprietary software for the online magnet application process. He said the software will again be used Jan. 17 when round one of the choice selection process for the new student assignment plan begins.
"My impression was that the only way this plan can go forward with fidelity is to use his software," said Democratic board member Christine Kushner.
James Overman, head of the student assignment task force, said they decided to use Alves' software to "make sure we were doing it right."
Neter said they "didn't want to reinvent the wheel." But he said they're looking at using other software as long-term alternatives.
Republican board member John Tedesco said they had looked at Alves' software when he was chairing the now-defunct student assignment committee. He said it was "probably the best software to use for a choice model."
Democratic board member Jim Martin joined Goldman in asking for information on how much the district is paying for the use of Alves' software.
Goldman said that she had "a few other questions" about that Dec. 7 meeting.
Goldman questioned why it wasn't communicated ahead of time to the whole board via e-mail.
Goldman also said she's repeatedly heard that Tata supported and approved the meeting. So she said she was going to put Tata "on the spot" by asking "did he support and approve that private meeting with select board members?"
Tata said Democratic board chairman Kevin Hill approached him after the Dec. 6 meeting about reserving a room the following day for the three new members. He said "there was no formal vetting."
“I felt like it was part of the orientation because they had been going through orientation, and maybe I should have stopped and involved the whole board but to me it was because we were running the new board members through orientation for many days preceding that," Tata said.
Goldman asked Tata if he knew who planned to be in the meeting and what the purpose of the meeting was.
"I think Kevin expressly said the three new board members and Michael Alves so they could get an update," Tata answered. "And again, it’s probably my mistake for not involving the entire board.”
“I don’t think it’s your mistake," Goldman said. "It’s the chairman’s mistake.”
“But I do remember you saying you thought that was a good idea," Hill said to Tata. "No, I didn’t ask permission. I made the superintendent aware that we would like to do this.
I think I said specifically because I’m not going to do this behind your back. I wanted him fully involved with what was going on and I thought it would be good for the three new board members to get up to speed and Tony said, ‘Yeah, I think that would be a good idea.’"
Goldman then pressed Hill on how the meeting was arranged considering Alves lives in Massachusetts.
Hill answered that Alves was in town and getting ready to leave.
“The organization that was helping with the funding wanted to make him available to the new board members to get them up to speed," Hill said.
The request evidently came before the Dec. 6 meeting because Hill responded that he told the group he couldn't make any commitments. But after being elected chairman on Dec. 6, he said he was able to do so.
“I don’t think you need to second guess it," Hill said. "I think it was part of orientation, and I was in a position to make that commitment and I did. I take full responsibility for that and I’ve corrected the media and others.
It was not a secret meeting. And I think some meetings are best held in small meetings like the board did, which you participated in many times during the summer when we met with the student assignment team in groups of three. It’s been practice.”
“I think the redistricting was held much the same way,” added Democratic school board member Susan Evans.
“But the difference is the whole board was aware of it,” Goldman responded.
“And the whole board was involved,” added Republican board member Deborah Prickett.
“I think we’re getting in the weeds,” Evans said.
“Is this part of the written agenda?” asked Democratic school board vice chairman Keith Sutton.
“No, but it has relevancy,” Goldman responded.
“We need to get this cleared up,” Prickett added.
Republican board member Chris Malone said he doesn't have a problem with the new members meeting with Alves, which Goldman said she agreed with as well. But Malone said that there should have been notification to the whole board ahead of time, especially in light of the concerns that AdvancED raised in its accreditation report about board governance.
“Perhaps that night you should have said it at the board meeting,” Malone said.
“With all due respect, were you guys notified of the probably 20-something hours we spent in orientation?” Martin responded loudly.
“We were,” Tedesco said. “That’s what I was going to say. I do appreciate Kevin thinking it was orientation, but we did get schedules of all the orientation meetings. Plus the additional materials that you were presented with at orientation, we were all given copies of.
This was the one meeting on your orientation agenda with materials for the orientation that we were not copied on. So that’s what the concern is.”
Goldman added that "the other piece that’s a little bit disturbing" was that Hill was contacted about the meeting before he was elected chairman.
“You said you were asked about setting it up beforehand but you were not the chair," Goldman said. "So I guess was there a collusion or a polling of potential board members of who this is who we’re electing as chair and this is what we’re doing so it’s all planned out ahead and other people knew that to contact you and say, ‘Hey when you’re chair set this up?”
“No I was pretty much following what I read Mr. Tedesco said in the paper that he thought I was probably going to be chair,” Hill responded, drawing a laugh from Tedesco and other board members.
“There was no collusion,” Sutton said. “Ms. Goldman, would you like Mr. Alves’ phone number?”
Goldman answered that she and Kushner had briefly met with Alves on Jan. 6. She said that's where she learned Wake was using Alves' software. She said Alves said "some really interesting things" that she wished the entire board had heard.
Tata interjected that Alves had been in town last month for implementation of the magnet selection process.
“I could have done a better job after Kevin talked with me in making sure everybody understood this meeting was taking place," Tata added.
“Okay then so apology accepted,” Sutton said to end the discussion. “You’ve been brought up to speed. The new board members have been brought up to speed. Is there anyone else who needs to be brought up to speed?"

Comments
The "Can't We All Just Get Along" Police
Sat, 01/21/2012 - 01:11 — csnowftwWarning to Wake: AdvancED may police the decorum of your discussions as well as make you believe you all must think alike...
“I think the redistricting was held much the same way,” added Democratic school board member Susan Evans.
“But the difference is the whole board was aware of it,” Goldman responded.
“And the whole board was involved,” added Republican board member Deborah Prickett.
“I think we’re getting in the weeds,” Evans said.
“Is this part of the written agenda?” asked Democratic school board vice chairman Keith Sutton.
“No, but it has relevancy,” Goldman responded.
“We need to get this cleared up,” Prickett added.
“No I was pretty much following what I read Mr. Tedesco said in the paper that he thought I was probably going to be chair,” Hill responded, drawing a laugh from Tedesco and other board members.
Sutton said. “Ms. Goldman, would you like Mr. Alves’ phone number?”
“You’ve been brought up to speed. The new board members have been brought up to speed. Is there anyone else who needs to be brought up to speed?"
again, politics
Sat, 01/14/2012 - 08:08 — snordoneelections are never unknowns. Perry knew the dems would win at least 2 weeks before the election. And the republicans knew they were likely losing 2 weeks before the election. Polls were done, plans were made, conversations were had.They are ALL the same. Anyone who thinks any of them are virtuous is blind to the reality of this.
The only thing that matter is - who has been effective at their job? My opinion - JT has exposed a lot and changed the dynamics of the conversation surrounding ED children. He has not done it gracefully at times, but he did it. Prickett has quietly, effectively, significantly strengthened the schools in D7. She did what she was supposed to do - supported the needs of her constituents. I choose to ignore the board table nonsense and look at what they are doing away from the table. Truth be told, nothing gets accomplished at that table.
Policywonk?! Watchdog?! Not
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 18:51 — ruthlissPolicywonk?! Watchdog?! Not by a long shot!
Goldman
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 12:12 — EBDarcyIs she kidding? She didn't go to her swearing-in knowing she and Margiotta would be taking over? There was no behind the scenes discussion when the Repubs kicked Hill out and installed Margiotta and Goldman?
WEll..
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 12:34 — Bob_SconceOf course there was. And, it was all perfectly legal.
This tempest is only because the new board members made a big stink about their new and improved style of governance.
I don't really care about this particular thing. But, it really got the new board off to a bad start, and doesn't bode well for what will happen when something serious, and unexpected, comes along. They just need a big group-hug and to all go out to dinner together, preferably someplace with beer and pool tables -- as long as they don't discuss board business, they ought to be able to do it without inviting the public.
I Think She Definitely Knows That....
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 12:20 — JanisTangoI personally thought the discussion continuing was initially silly, but there are two things that the new board supporters seems to forget....
1) this previous board majority was crucified for conducting board business prior to being sworn in. Where is the outrage about what this new board majority has done?
2) What about the governance issue that Advanced ED brought out? Will this dem only meeting with Alves get us in trouble with Advanced ED in regards to governance? Where is all the concern about losing our accredidation like we heard in the past?
I personally would like to see Kevin Hill speak up and apologize and say it was a mistake and move forward. Instead all we continue to get is a bunch of excuses. I wish the previous board majority would have apologized when it happened 2 years ago. Just because they didn't doesn't mean this new board majority shouldn't. Aren't we wanting this new board to work together? Apologize and let's move forward!
Point of the Alves Meeting
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 13:20 — MiraMilI gather that Tata and Hill believe that the point of the Alves meeting with the new board members was to get the new board members up to speed on the choice plan and have the opportunity to get more information from its architect. There was not an intent to formulate board policy at this meeting. In other words, Tata, Hill and the new board members perceived the meeting as part of the new board members orientation and information gathering. The old board members have had access to Alves all along and were able to ask questions, etc. all along. It probably was a bad call on Hill's part not to inform the other board members, but seems to me that the Republican Board members are trying to attribute some nefarious motivation to the meeting where there was none in order to score political points. I'd also say that this differs markedly from the Republican secret meetings at which board policy and strategy to get the Republicans policy implemented was clearly the aim. That said, it's water under the bridge and the board needs to move on from this.
Ms. Goldman has made her point (ad nauseum as usual), now lets drop the whole thing and have the board focus on education rather than getting into stupid divisive political point scoring.
So...
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 15:42 — Bob_Sconcethe point of the Alves meeting with the new board members was to get the new board members up to speed on the choice plan
Considering how much criticism the plan took from some of those new members during the election, I thought that they already understood it.
Here's one thing I don't get, though: Alves was in town anyway, and just stopped by the district offices to do this presentation. Why was he here? I know the general answer "to meet with WEP and the Chamber," but why did they want to meet with him?
I believe Tata stated in the
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 20:22 — kbrooks500I believe Tata stated in the COW meeting that Alves was here for Magnet school choice implementation. The district is using software he created. Goldman also claimed to be unaware the district had agreed to use his software, but staff stated that it was denoted as part of the initial cost.
"Ms. Goldman has made her
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 14:17 — jeannie84"Ms. Goldman has made her point (ad nauseum as usual), now lets drop the whole thing and have the board focus on education rather than getting into stupid divisive political point scoring."
Amen, Mira! Geez, talk about beating a dead horse. Let's move onto more important matters, like ensuring the quality education of our children.
Kettle
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 11:17 — valsparBlack.
Terry Stoops - really? An apology from WEP ad the Chamber? What an idiot.
Like the Republican majority never had meetings of three. Did Goldman inform the entire board ahead of time when Tedesco and Margiotta went to her house to pressure her into voting their way on the Tedesco SA Plan? If I recall, Tedesco said she baked cookies or cake, or something. Did Tedesco inform the board that members of the board were meeting singularly with him to draw the boundary lines of his student assignment plan?
The idiot speaks
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 12:22 — stoopsThe main distinction between your account and the secret Alves meeting is that the WEP and the Chamber - organizations that profess to serve all WCPSS stakeholders - did not coordinate with the Republicans to meet at Goldman's house for cookies and cake.
The Idiot Speaks
Sat, 01/14/2012 - 21:59 — jeffrey1The Idiot Speaks
valspar - PWNED Again!
The difference in credibility is HUGE.
Sat, 01/14/2012 - 02:54 — raleighlauraThis is not the republicans talking among themselves. This is democratic board members, with the Chair's explicit approval, paid for by the Chamber and WEP, two traditionally non partisan entities, purposefully excluding sitting board members from a meeting with the key architect of the most important assignment plan to be implemented in the last decade.
How is this not an outrage? Do Hill and Sutton not get that? Does the Chamber not see that? Does WEP not see that? I'm shocked that Tata missed it, but thought it was nice of Hill to throw him so promptly under the bus with the "hey, I told you" sentiment.
Sutton
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 11:03 — valsparAwesome.
Indeed
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 18:34 — duvalGoldman and Prickett are coming across as extremely petty...looking to pick a fight and trying to justify their past behavior.
Move on.
I disagree completely.
Sat, 01/14/2012 - 21:15 — raleighlauraThey want inclusion, and given they were absolutely killed in the press by these same people two years ago, it only seems fair that they either get it or get an apology.
Tempest
Fri, 01/13/2012 - 10:46 — Bob_SconceTeapot.