Wake County Superintendent Tony Tata isn't backing down from the concerns he's raised about the ties between the Great Schools in Wake Coalition and school board members Susan Evans and Christine Kushner.
Tata issued a statement today warning that the two board members may have "potential serious code of ethics violations" because of their ties with Great Schools. He also alleges that Great Schools has a "stranglehold" on the board members.
Both board members told Tata in their email responses they're not currently involved with the group. But Tata charges they refused his requests to sever ties with Great Schools.
Tata is supposed to meet with Evans and Kushner this week to talk in person about the concerns.
Here's a quick preface to Tata's statement. I tried to reach Tata on Monday but it appears the message never reached him.
"My response would have been that these are potential serious code of ethics violations on behalf of some board members of which I have already personally alerted the board chair to. I have had multiple private conversations with these members asking them to sever their ties with this special interest group and they refused. Membership in or support of special interest groups is strictly forbidden, as are secret meetings, secret draft resolutions and the like. Their attendance on stage as members of GSIW less than 3 weeks ago at an award ceremony is tantamount to members of the general assembly banking and finance committee receiving an award on behalf of Bank of America and then returning to the committee table pretending to represent all banks and the public equally. All of this came to light at the same time last week on the heels of their very public display of membership in and support of a special interest group. While March's Advance Ed report got dramatic coverage because it hammered one side of the aisle the recent report got tepid coverage. I fear that the hard work put into raising our accreditation, protecting our high school diplomas, and demonstrating good governance over the past year is threatened by the very narrow interests of this special interest group and the stranglehold they have on a couple of board members. But I think we can work through this and we have a meeting Friday to discuss how to move forward.
Had you asked, that is what I would have said."
Comments
were you hear when they got rid of Burns?
Wed, 02/22/2012 - 06:52 — sunc5238Last I checked, the superintendent works for the School Board, not the other way around. The board sets the policies and the superintendent implements the policies. The whole reason Dell Burns was forced out was due to the fact that he did not align his thinking to the new board majority, who had major ties to Art Pope and the other groups that got the new board (at that time) elected. The big concern is that you now have a superintendent who was hired by the previous school board majority having to deal with a different makeup on the school board. The WCPSS has had a long history of school board members aligning themselves with outside groups, many of which conflict with the policies of the current board or superintendent. I am not saying anyone is right or wrong in this whole process, but this isn't an issue that is new to this school board. Burns went through all this when the new board took over and now Tata has to deal with the same issues. Do I think that the new members are influenced in some ways by outside groups, absolutely. But I don't think it is any worse than Tedesco being influenced by any of the groups that helped him get elected. I wish the school board could be politically party free, but I don't ever see that happening.
Correction
Wed, 02/22/2012 - 11:55 — FSandYOUBurns wasn't forced out, he quit.
Thankfully.
So...
Wed, 02/22/2012 - 09:10 — Bob_SconceStarnous has it right below. One add: the activities you're describing under the previous board were exactly the things that AdvanceEd complained about. If you value accreditation (which the new board members claim to), then they shouldn't be doing the same thing.
The problem is not being influenced by outsider -- that's true of everybody in every walk of life; no man is an island. The problem is being a representative of an outside group that is deliberately telling falsehoods about the district.
Can Advance Ed Come and Investigate
Wed, 02/22/2012 - 20:41 — VillageMentalityThese Potential Ethics Violations by Evans and Kushner? Only seems fair. After all, once the new democratic members were voted in, Advance Ed seemed to miraculously lift the cloud of losing accredidation over wcpss....
Were you here when Burns retired?
Wed, 02/22/2012 - 07:26 — starsonoursBurns got rid of himself. He decided to retire. The Super does work for the board and I am sure Tata is aware of this. He is carrying out the policies of the Board and was only asking for clarification of why 2 Board members would be associated with a group that is so anti Tata and his staff (employees of the Board). A group that is spreading dis-information about what WCPSS is doing and then gives awards to 2 board members. Why is it so wrong to point this out? How does asking a question (what Tata did) equal refusing to do your job (what Burns did)? Evans and Kushner are upset that Tata forced them to make a statement that they did not want to make and say they were not involved with GSIW. Why is it so hard for them to say that?
One fix...
Wed, 02/22/2012 - 09:13 — Bob_SconceThe award were given by WakeUP Wake County to GSIW. Kushner and Evans accepted them on behalf of GSIW. If you're an organization who's going to receive an award, do you have it accepted by people who aren't intimitely involved in the organization to accept your award? Of course not. It'd be like the NY Giants sending Phil Simms (the team's former quarterback) up to accept the Superbowl trophy.
I agree Solon
Tue, 02/21/2012 - 21:59 — realisticThe plan continues to roll along. It is truly "Tata's Plan". The new board has not changed it at all.
No this is the WCPSS's plan.
Wed, 02/22/2012 - 00:05 — starsonoursNo this is the WCPSS's plan. Either the plan is successful and everyone (Board and Staff) are successful. Or the plan fails and everyone (Board and Staff) fails. If the new members are going into this with the attitude that they have no responsibility for this plan then they should resign as members of the board. If they feel the plan is flawed, debate the flaws and change them. They have the majority and can make any change they want! If they do nothing then they are agreeing with the plan as is. They won their respective elections, they can lead or get out of the way, we don't need a bunch of "I told you so's" as board members.
There is a lot of pressure
Tue, 02/21/2012 - 22:12 — jenmanThere is a lot of pressure from the Chamber for this plan to go through. I think it is very much their plan.
No offensive intended but I
Tue, 02/21/2012 - 19:19 — starsonoursNo offensive intended but I doubt you would ever see anything Evans, Martin or Kushner did as a violation of the Code of Ethics.
funny how that "blind eye"
Tue, 02/21/2012 - 18:37 — jeannie84funny how that "blind eye" suddenly cleared up, now that Dems are in the majority on the Board
Could you provide some
Tue, 02/21/2012 - 19:17 — starsonoursCould you provide some specifics instead of a blanket statement?