Liberals finally support D11 voucher candidate

The liberals who run a local D11watch blog (Lois Fornander, Mary Ellen McNally, and other elderly anti-parent women), have actually endorsed a closet voucher proponent for election to the D11 board of education. While calling pro-reform board member Willie Breazell a “privatizer” for his correct belief that parents should have a say over how and where their children are educated, these humorless septuagenarians have unwittingly thrown their support behind Tom Strand, whose campaign manager is none other than voucher queen Karen Teja.

On June 23rd, 2004, Teja introduced the following voucher proposal during that night’s board meeting:

Resolution as proposed by Director Teja:
RESOLUTION EDUCATIONAL SERVICES TO MEET THE NEEDS OF EVERY CHILD
WHEREAS, the Board has resolved to strive to offer or have available a program to meet the needs of every child; and
WHEREAS, the Board has expressed it support of teachers, staff, and the greater community in all their efforts to create dynamic and effective learning environments for all students; and
WHEREAS, the Board has resolved to empower each teacher, administrator, and school site to become entrepreneurial in their approach to meeting the educational needs of their communities; and
WHEREAS, the Board has pledged that District 11 will make efforts to help parents meet the educational needs of their children; and
WHEREAS, parents of students of District 11 have acknowledged these commitments of the Board and expressed to the Superintendent their interest in meeting their children’s’ needs through child-centered educational opportunities available to them in the greater community; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article IX, Section 15 of the Constitution of Colorado, the Directors of the Board of Education have control of the instruction in the District; and
WHEREAS, control of instruction necessarily includes insuring that community members retain, through their elected representatives, the ability to insure that tax money is spent wisely and that educational programs that are funded with taxpayer money are accountable to the community providing the funding; and
WHEREAS, educational programs must be accountable, performance-based, and reflect sound educational research; and
WHEREAS, under the authority conferred by Colorado Revised Statute § 22-32-101, the District is a body corporate with the customary powers to hold property and to contract with other persons and entities for any purpose authorized by law; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute §§ 22-32-109(1)(t) and (v), the Board has the duty to determine the educational programs to be carried on in the schools of the District and the duty to cause an educational program to be maintained within the District, or if the Board makes a specific determination that such is necessary for the efficient operation of the District; and
WHEREAS, by enactment of amendments to Colorado Revised Statute § 22-32-122, the Colorado General Assembly has empowered school districts to contract with individuals, corporations, associations, and a variety of other entities for the performance of educational services of comparable quality and meeting the same requirements and standards as would be necessary if performed by the school district; and
WHEREAS, the Board wishes to empower and encourage the Superintendent to use all appropriate educational programs and opportunities to strive to meet the needs of every child;
THE BOARD HEREBY RESOLVES that the Superintendent is authorized and directed, pursuant to the cited statutory authorities and such other legal authorities as may similarly empower the Superintendent, to provide transportation for students who are enrolled in a District school that has been identified for school improvement under the No Child Left Behind Act and seek to transfer to any eligible District 11school selected by the student's parents;
Board of Education 06/23/04
THE BOARD FURTHER RESOLVES that the Superintendent is authorized and directed, pursuant to the cited statutory authorities and such other legal authorities as may similarly empower the Superintendent to expand our services for the provision of educational services whereby the District will consider contracting for the provision of educational services at educational institutions recommended by the parents of children who have a qualifying disability under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act if the student's IEP team determines that the child cannot receive a free appropriate public education through services provided by the District's staff;
THE BOARD FURTHER RESOLVES that the Superintendent shall expand our services in these areas and prepare guidelines for participating students and qualification of educational institutions consistent with the criteria listed above and shall endeavor to have this program available commencing with the 2004-2005 school year. Any contract or agreement negotiated by the Superintendent shall be presented to the Board for approval of the terms and conditions of the agreement including terms and conditions of any agreement with a qualifying educational institution at which the educational services will be provided.

ADOPTED by the Board of Directors the _____ day of June 2004.
________________________
Board President
ATTEST:
________________________
Secretary

The majority of the board voted “yes” for this Teja voucher proposal, but due to an administrative error, the district never implemented the plan for the entire district. Notice Teja’s use of the word “entrepreneurial” in the resolution. Teja spent ½ hour at a board meeting explaining that “entrepreneurial” was a code word for “privatization.” Notice, also, her desire to allow contracts with private entities. Interesting that she would declare herself to be a part of the “privatization movement” that her kind fear so much. We can only assume that Strand knows that she is a part of this growing movement.

According to the Gazette, Teja demonstrated her commitment to vouchers by having the district issue her one of her very own.

Those who live in D11 remember this Gazette article:

$5,000 tutoring bill questioned
By SHARI CHANEY THE GAZETTE

Two Colorado Springs school board members allege one of their colleagues received special treatment when Colorado Springs School District 11 paid nearly $5,000 for private tutoring of her child. Board member Craig Cox distributed a packet of e-mails and a district purchase order to other board members two weeks ago. He said the purchase order shows $4,950 of district spending for “support services” of a special- needs student, including tutoring at home.

District officials said the purchase order represents the only time since at least January 2004 that D-11 has paid for a private tutor to help a student. All other tutoring services in the nearly 30,000-student district are provided by D-11 employees, the officials said. Cox claims the purchase order involves tutoring for board member Karen Teja’s child, a contention that board member Eric Christen repeated at last week’s board meeting. Plans were made at the meeting to form a committee to address other issues surrounding private tutors. “The ultimate agreement that we come to had better look like Director Teja’s, who’s getting her tutoring paid for for free, or there will be hell to pay,” Christen said.

Cox and Christen have frequently clashed with Teja and some of the other board members over issues ranging from school vouchers to the D-11 contract with the teachers union. Teja declined to discuss the purchase order, saying any comments would have the effect of divulging private student records. District officials also declined to identify the student who is receiving private tutoring at public expense, citing state and federal law that prohibits such a disclosure. Cox said some other parents, including some D-11 employees, also receive free private tutoring. He said he has seen purchase orders for those services, but he could not provide them. But Deb Key, the district’s custodian of records, said the district purchase order that Cox already distributed is the only one for payment for private tutoring.

Robert Howell, D-11’s executive director of special education, said he has not authorized any private tutoring since July, when he took the department’s top post. Tutoring provided by someone outside the district is unusual, said Howell, because most services can be provided by the district. After looking at the purchase order in question, Howell said a private tutor in remedial reading was hired by the district to provide services to a special-needs student. He said he doesn’t know why the payment was authorized. The order says services would run from July 1, 2004, through December...

As a parent, Cox said he doesn’t fault Teja for fighting to get what her child needs to be successful. But she should have worked to make the same opportunities available for other parents, Cox said. “My goal isn’t to shut this down,” Cox said. Instead, he said, he would like to expand the program and allow district administrators to authorize private tutoring for all children who have been identified with a reading problem, including dyslexia. He said he doesn’t have a specific plan to pay for such a program, but he would start with cuts in the administration. “We don’t need all those executive directors,” Cox said. Eventually, he said, district teachers should be trained to recognize signs of dyslexia and other reading problems. He said the district should have resources to test students and offer them help quickly.

No other D11 school board member has ever received a voucher. It is obvious that since Strand’s campaign manager supports vouchers for D11 parents, then he most certainly shares that view. Teja, who took legal action against her own school district while a sitting board member, does not tolerate people who do not share her viewpoint. She most certainly would not be running Strand’s campaign without also controlling his agenda.

Although Strand has literally done nothing since being appointed to the board last January, he obviously has a secret voucher agenda equal to that of Teja’s.

It is great to see that the liberals are finally coming around and supporting parental choice through vouchers. While Strand’s campaign manager supported vouchers only for herself and select D11 staff members, we can hope that Strand expands the choice option to include regular old district parents. According to the minutes of that June 23rd board meeting, Lois Fornander holds out that same hope:

Lois Fornander, topic: choice. Commented on the proposed Resolution- Educational
Services to Meet the Needs of Every Child. Stated that voucher programs are unaccountable.
Ms. Fornander also commented “If you open the voucher door to some, it will be open to
all.”

Thank you, Lois. We join you in that hope.