Posted by R_U_Kooky on May 22, 2008 at 7:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I have to agree with Dunn on this. His email to the teachers was an innocent mistake. Susan Falk the Union President states "We don't muscle or strong-arm anyone... but now we will move ahead with ahead with the hearing." It sure seems like the Teacher's Union management is a vindictive bunch. I wonder how many of the teachers actually appreciated Mr. Dunn’s note asking them for their opinions on the holiday schedule...

Oh wait; maybe that's the problem... Could it be that the Teacher's Union management is losing its iron fisted grip on our good teachers? Ms. Falk and the Teacher’s Union management need to relax and to spend more time working on the issues that matter, such as our district’s financial shortfall.

Oh wait, they did! They were the bunch that initiated the efforts to close two schools.

No good will come to our children through this pursuit of a hearing. Why waste this time and energy just to extract an apology for what is widely understood to be an innocent mistake?

Just my two cents -

Posted by insideinfo on May 22, 2008 at 8:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Those who criticize Dunn are evil. They want corrupt government run by special interests not the people who pay for the public schools.

Factoid: follow the money.........VC Form 460
elections division, public records.

CTA, UACT, and UACT PAC contributions to CVUSD board members.
Stephens.......$4,866
Didio..........$3,900
Beaubien.......$4,200
Phelps.........$3,566

No wonder the parents feel ignored by the board.

PERB never ruled on the merits of the UACT harassment of the only board member they do not contro. They only offered mediation.

Power to the people.

Posted by Poppa on May 22, 2008 at 8:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Those who criticize Dun are evil" "member they do not contro". This shows Dunn supporters are not only wack jobs, but that they cannot spell either. I suspect Mr. Dunn was never offered money by this teachers union because he is such a strange and destructive Board Member. Mr. Dunn is really a disgrace to the Conejo and if he had a shred of decency he would resign immediately!

Posted by hrwmnw on May 22, 2008 at 8:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I am relatively new to this community (four years) but after reading this and past reports about this sitution, this is "all to do about nothing"! Big deal! So a member asked a simple innocent question of teachers. What a waste of energy and especially money is being spent because of some petty and vindictive people! Some of these people are acting more childish then some of the young children they supposedly are so concerned about. As far as I see it this has been instigated and pushed along by the Teacher's Union along with the "quiet" support of a number of the school board members who seem to care more about hopefully seeing another board member that they dislike "hang in the wind" rather than truly look out for the best interest of our children and save this wasteful amount of needed money on staff time and expensive lawyers. Ms. Falk - you need to "Get a life!" and as my grandmother would have said to you and everyone here "Shame on you all!".

Posted by Poppa on May 22, 2008 at 2:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No shame on you! This Dunn person breaks the law and people like you turn a blind eye! What a terrible example you and Dunn are setting for children! God bless Ms. Falk for standing up to this bully and lawbreaker, that is a great example for the children of the Conejo!

Posted by MAC on May 22, 2008 at 2:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Stop worrying about Mike Dunn and start worrying about how to safe two school from closing. What is more important Dunn or the kids? Get your prioritis in order.

Posted by Poppa on May 22, 2008 at 2:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"how to safe two school from closing"? Looks like the same person did all the posts above, or maybe the Dunn followers just don't know how to read and write. I read the API scores today in the Star and it looks like schools here in the Conejo are doing very well!

Posted by R_U_Kooky on May 22, 2008 at 5:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I think some of the posters are missing a big piece to this puzzle. It was the Conejo Teacher's Union which lobbied the school district to close some schools.

Mr. Dunn was against these closures and as a result he's paying the price through these politically motivated attacks. Taking a guess I’d say the Teacher’s Union wants him out so that they can gain more control over the school board.

I have never met or spoken to Mr. Dunn and most likely never will. However, as a parent with children in the Conejo Valley Unified School District I appreciate the fact that he stuck to his principles by voting against the school closures.

If you think about all the recent parent protests, the picketing and the "Save Our Schools" efforts he was the elected official that best represented the constituents which elected him.

The question I have is why did the Teacher’s Union want to close the schools when the School Board did not? If someone knows the answer to this please post it.

Posted by hrwmnw on May 23, 2008 at 12:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Poppa, don't get your panties in a tightwad! Maybe you should take some anti-hesteria meds. All three of your postings contain no facts and have only consisted of verbal attacks or negative innuendos on everyone who believes that this is a big waste of the school district and board's time and energy by the Teacher's Union and those supporting them. "Broke the law"! Please! Is what he did so terrible? Did anyone get killed here? Everyone should get their priorities straight. I do not know Mr. Dunn and don't really care if he is on the board or not in this situation. What I care about is my children (hopefully you don't have any!) and how the money we pay into the system with our taxes is used. In this case not very well. Common sense has not reigned here. Ms. Falk (who I also don't know) and the union officials should have accepted the fact that he said he won't repeat what he did again and move on with more important matters. Case closed! That is of course unless they really have another agenda to achieve? However in your case, I'm sure it's good that you know you're a perfect person and have never made an innocent mistake or accidently did something that maybe you shouldn't have done. Oh and be sure to check all my spellings!

Posted by we_r_right on May 23, 2008 at 7:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is simply a partisan move by the heavily liberal DEMs in the union. Susan F hates Mike Dunn, who was elected 3 times to the Ventura County Republican Central Committee. She is retiring in 3 weeks, and she wants to finish him off before she loses power. Her successor is much more moderate. PERB did not want to do anything about this minor, minor complaint. They let the statute of limitations run out. There can be NO litigation now. When I called them 2 years ago about this, they told me that many, many of their cases just stay unresolved.

This complaint by the UACT directors was fanned into flames for political reasons. They want to intimidate any conservative/republican from ever thinking about running for the CVUSD school board. Several republicans who were interested in running in the past have said that they won't be in the race this time. The personal price is too high. This vicious union leadership is playing old-style mafia longshoremen style politics. The dirtier the better, for them.

This all started from a tiny, tiny, sentence in the teachers' union contract with the district about being included in calendar negotiations. This district allows the teachers union to participate. Not all school districts have this in their contract with the unions. And because of this little known sentence, the union dons decided to go after a very hard-working (but republican) trustee. Mike did apologize more than 30 months ago for his mistake in polling the teachers about the preferences for winter break. This is not exactly the worst sin in the world. As a matter of fact, it isn't even a crime, or really even breaking "the law", since it is simply a mistake which crossed over into allegations of violating government code about labor negotiations. That was quite a stretch. And that's why PERB let the time run out. This is going to be a HUGE PR disaster for the union. They should accept Mike's counter offer, which is not to poll teachers on labor issues about calendars, and confidentiality. I'm confident that the next UACT Pres will accept this offer, and close this stupid complaint. And like Mike said at the last board meeting (rerun of his speech tonight, 8:15 Channel 20 and tomorrow Sat at about 12:15) this is nothing to get in a twist about when compared with the major problems of today. Putting this complaint into perspective, he told the Board that he has seen over 400 fatalities in his work as an LA City firefighter.

Posted by we_r_right on May 23, 2008 at 8:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Supt Contini was fabricating (again) when he said that PERB was finally getting around to this complaint after 2 and a half years. He invented an explanation that this was due to PERB's heavy workload. Tell us the name of the person at PERB that said that. He can't. Well, when I spoke to PERB about this last month, there was NO such fairy tale.

The case was only reopened and reviewed because the union boss, Arleigh Kidd, wanted to re-open this, before President Susan Falk left office. This non-urgent complaint is so unimportant, that PERB was letting it dry up. This does NOT need to cost the union or the district any money, since there is no real deadline.

According to PERB, it can stay unresolved forever. Or the new President, Colleen Brennerschmidt, can choose to accept a verbal apology, again, from Mike Dunn, and a promise, again, not to poll the teachers on calendar issues, PLUS a gag order on the union and press. No money needs to be spent. Just wait this out until Susan Falk retires, and this nonsense will go away.

However, we will NOT forget the part that Supt. Mario Contini played in this. What was he thinking, rushing to sign an agreement like that unfair settlement after 2 and a half years, under the pressure of Board Pres Dorothy Beaubien? (Ridiculous document posted on CVUSD website agenda page.) Contini could have stalled, or just been a man and said "no" to her. He is planning on retiring early, anyway, before his contract is up. Since he is going to leave in a year, I say we help him along. He is WAY to cozy with special interest groups, (like Measure B opponents) and not responsive enough to parents and taxpayers. He acts like HE is the boss of Mike, when in fact, Contini needs to show more respect to a trustee. I say, vote in 2 new board members, and then the new majority can fire Contini in December. There has to be better talent out there for this job that pays over $168K plus travel, plus benefits. Any takers?

Posted by we_r_right on May 24, 2008 at 8:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

to Poppa: Did you watch any of the reruns or were you at the Board meeting? Did you hear board member Tim Stephens go on and on and on about opposing Measure B? That was a violation of their new protocol rules. Last summer he also made a long speech supporting Supt of Jack O'Connell, saying he is being tapped to be the next governor. Stephens said O'Connell (a Democrat) would make an excellent governor. Stephens gets tons of money and support from the local Dems and the unions.

Anyway, on Tuesday, CVUSD Board Pres Dorothy Beaubien finally told Stephens to stop, as he was getting "a little too political". He argued with her, and wanted to continue his anti-B speech. So, why isn't Stephens "censured" for those violations? Because he is part of the majority who have voting power in the CVUSD. He gets a pass every time, since he is a DEM.

Those of you who are naive, will say there shouldn't be politics on school boards. Well, "sweetie", (as Barack would call you) that's not reality. And those same readers who are appalled at the thought of partisan politics in the schools, I bet you are members of the mighty PTA, a registered 501(c)(3) political lobbying group. Take a look at their state website. If you are a conservative, an independent, or a republican, you will be shocked at the legislation this group supports.

Do some research, and then pull out of the PTA. No republican should be giving money to them. Switch your parent groups to a non-political organization, such as a PTO parent teacher organization, or a PFA a parent faculty association. You have to speak to the principal first. 6 schools in the Conejo are PTA-free. The past several Conejo Council Presidents of the PTA have all been against Mike Dunn, the Governor, and any Republican school board candidate. Open your eyes. Be honest. Are you part of the problem, as a silent "enabler" of the politics of the PTA?

Read Charlene Haar's book, "The Politics of the PTA". She is coming AGAIN from NY to speak here in the Conejo in the next couple of months. I forget the date. Most of America has left the PTA. Most being defined as 75% of America's schools. The last stronghold is here in southern California. Ask yourselves, is California education better for having the leftist PTA controlling the info parents get, and for the liberal laws they supported in Sacramento? Do you support SB777, the LGBT law requiring teachers to accept, promote, and teach, the contributions of LGBT lifestyles as early as first grade? The PTA supported this bill. Ask your PTA school president about this. Many are clueless.

Posted by we_r_right on May 24, 2008 at 9:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

To Poppa about the API: Here is the link to Conejo Schools. The district scored a low 853, or only 81%, a B minus. Every 8 API points equals 1%. 1000 is 100% or an A plus, 960 is 95% or a mid "A", 920 is 90% or an A minus, 840 is 80% a B minus, 760 is 70% a C minus, 680 is 60% a D minus, 600 is 50% an F minus.

http://api.cde.ca.gov/AcntRpt2008/200...

You will see that 4 schools scored below the state minimum, which is 75% or 800 points. They are Conejo, Glenwood, Manzanita, and Park Oaks. Our 4 high schools are barely above the minimum. NPHS is only 803 or 75%, TOHS is 824 or 78%, WLHS 832 or 79%. Pretty sad.

The part of the updated API report that scares realtors, is the similar school rankings. It compares your neighborhood school with 9 others of similar demographics. In other words, with your tax dollars, your education, you might have chosen 9 other areas in California with similar characteristics for your family. If your school scores a 9 or 10, then you should be happy with the amount of education you were able to give your kids in your neighborhood, with the money you could afford for rent or a mortgage. BUT, if your school is a 3 or 4, as many are in the Conejo, then you are paying too much for your house(duh!!) for the results that show up in your kid's test scores. That is very simplistic, but basically the idea.

Notice that the 2 schools picked for closure (Meadows and University) scored 3's. That is what nailed the coffin shut for them. Similar school scores tell the real story for administrators. You better learn about this. You should think about moving OUT of a neighborhood with low rankings, because your house values tank because of this, even if the academic scores are high. Now you see why the "Blue Ribbon" award is hollow. These same administrators understand that there is now academic value in these expensive awards. They were not impressed with hearing about Blue ribbons during school closure meetings, because these were PR projects. Sorry. Your schools are valued by realtors and administrators because of similar school rankings, not for outdated and "outed" shallow claims to fame. It hurts, I know. You've been played by the old timers at the CVUSD. Remember to vote them out in November. Please read on.

Posted by we_r_right on May 24, 2008 at 9:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

There are about 20 factors that go into the demographics that are evaluated at the Dept of Ed. Sacramento tweaks these every year, trying to find a formula that most accurately reflects what "similar" might mean. Call the PhD that cooks this up. She is very nice and loves hearing from parents, which is very rare, she told me.

In the 2006-2007 report (see link) there were 6 out of 27 traditional schools in CVUSD that had similar school scores of 5 or less. Not good for those parents who could have given their kids better educations in other parts of Calif for the same house dollars (according to the master computer at the State Dept of Ed.) Of course, it is ultimately up to parents to decide what factors are most important to them when chosing their homes and schools.

The similar school ranking is offered as a guide, according the Dept of Ed. It needs to be balanced with the API testing score average for that school. And then, parents need to see if their kids are happy and safe in that school, and if their student's report cards indicate that they are learning satisfactorily, regardless of the performance of other kids in the classroom.

Poppa, is this clear to you now? The CVUSD is pretty good, considering it has 11% socio-economically disadvantaged students. The schools are safe and clean, compared to urban schools. It is a nice district for its huge size, but it is not at the top of the heap in the nation.

Posted by koolwhazzup on May 24, 2008 at 7:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

To "Poppa"-
If anyone should apologize, it is Didio and Beaubion, who for their 20 years on the CVUSD Board have allowed our high school facilities to deteriorate to the point that makes inner city schools in LAUSD look like high-tech schools of the future.
These 2 Board Members have neglected science labs which are outdated, moved "ghetto portables", which have now become permanent, onto the campuses, allowed walkways to become chewing gum and garbage receptacles-they need to be power
washed-and allowed a class bell schedule right out of the 1950's to continue for years at TO High School.
What happened to the $88 million school bond that we were told was needed a while back and we voters passed it-Vote Didio and Beaubion out in November and vote YES on Measure B on June 3!!