Are they Serious?
From the current Colorado Springs Independent: “One thing is certain: (Tami) Hasling doesn't approve. "It seems to me that there would be a conflict," she says. "It's disturbing, to be honest with you."
Finally, D11 Board President Tami Hasling, who has been missing in action over the Jan Tanner pizza scandal, speaks her mind. No more sitting back quietly while Tanner takes the tax payers of D11 for a ride as they finance her rich and famous lifestyle. Although Tanner admitted to the Gazette that she had a conflict of interest with her 6-figure money making scheme off of D11, Hasling has been mum on the issue. Progressives are rarely given permission to call out their fellow Progressives.
But wait – Hasling did not make this comment with regards to Tanner’s pizza deal. She made that comment about newly elected D11 board member Al Loma, who, much to Hasling & her handlers’ dismay, is no Progressive. In fact, as the Independent nervously points out, Loma is one of “those’ people who actually value students and their parents. What is his conflict? He sits on the board of a D11 charter school called the STAR Academy, and he has made it clear that he will not give up his seat on the charter board just because he will now be serving on the D11 board. There is neither a legal issue with Loma serving on both boards, nor is there an issue of a D11 policy violation, but Hasling’s handlers want to tar Loma early to let him know that he is not welcome in this D11 playground.
It would be easy to criticize Hasling for jumping on a non-issue (Loma) while ignoring a real issue (Tanner), but those who know Hasling understand that she does not make public pronouncements unless these pronouncements are given to her to be made. For those who attended or watched D11 board meetings during Hasling’s first year on the board, you will remember those meetings when she would read some previously prepared (for her) statement on issues that happened to have had no relevance at all to the issues being discussed. Poor Hasling would plod through her talking points with absolutely no idea that what she was reading was absolutely irrelevant and usually illogical.
So why are Hasling’s handlers upset with Al Loma? Because he is an outsider and not part of the corrupt system that is D11. While Hasling and others will declare that Loma has some conflict of interest because he is obviously a supporter of charters, and therefore of parental choice, nothing but love and adoration are being thrown at the other new BOE member, LuAnn Long. Long has been entrenched in D11 for years, begging the question of her conflicts. BOE members serve to represent the tax payers, not the administration. Long has a history of fighting any proposed changes that would benefit either the tax payers or students of D11. The reason that she is receiving such love and praise is because her fellow board members and administrators understand that she will be yet another champion of the status quo. Don’t expect your child to become her priority by any stretch of the imagination. As far as Sandra Mann’s re-election, let’s just hope that D11 never requires a breathalyzer test to be administered to board members prior to meetings.
Equally as funny, in a sad sort of way, as Hasling’s statement is a letter written to the Indy by John (it’s all about me) Gudvangen. The best I can tell, Gudvangen attempts to praise himself and attempts to take credit for an improved D11. Gudvangen is big on talking about civility, and he performed so well in this category that current members of the BOE let him know that they would campaign against him if he ran for re-election. Gudvangen was literally one of the least trustworthy members of the D11 board, once declaring that he could not be accused of lying because, “Everyone has their own truth.” Spoken like a true Relativist. That would explain why Gudvangen can claim that graduation rates have improved under his watch, when in fact they continue to decline. This would explain why Gudvangen can claim to have achieved success as a BOE member when several thousand more students have fled the district under his watch. This would explain why he could declare at a BOE meeting that, “We will never have a discussion about closing schools under my watch,” and then lead the charge to shut down 9 D11 schools. This would also explain why Gudvangen would exclaim in front of other D11 parents that he had no sympathy for students in low performing schools because it was not his fault that “their parents made some bad life choices.” Spoken like a true leader, Gudvangen.
At least it is refreshing to see Hasling & Gudvangen leaving with the same attitudes that brought them to the board in the first place. Those attitudes include a total disregard for the truth, and a total lack of concern for students.
Finally, D11 Board President Tami Hasling, who has been missing in action over the Jan Tanner pizza scandal, speaks her mind. No more sitting back quietly while Tanner takes the tax payers of D11 for a ride as they finance her rich and famous lifestyle. Although Tanner admitted to the Gazette that she had a conflict of interest with her 6-figure money making scheme off of D11, Hasling has been mum on the issue. Progressives are rarely given permission to call out their fellow Progressives.
But wait – Hasling did not make this comment with regards to Tanner’s pizza deal. She made that comment about newly elected D11 board member Al Loma, who, much to Hasling & her handlers’ dismay, is no Progressive. In fact, as the Independent nervously points out, Loma is one of “those’ people who actually value students and their parents. What is his conflict? He sits on the board of a D11 charter school called the STAR Academy, and he has made it clear that he will not give up his seat on the charter board just because he will now be serving on the D11 board. There is neither a legal issue with Loma serving on both boards, nor is there an issue of a D11 policy violation, but Hasling’s handlers want to tar Loma early to let him know that he is not welcome in this D11 playground.
It would be easy to criticize Hasling for jumping on a non-issue (Loma) while ignoring a real issue (Tanner), but those who know Hasling understand that she does not make public pronouncements unless these pronouncements are given to her to be made. For those who attended or watched D11 board meetings during Hasling’s first year on the board, you will remember those meetings when she would read some previously prepared (for her) statement on issues that happened to have had no relevance at all to the issues being discussed. Poor Hasling would plod through her talking points with absolutely no idea that what she was reading was absolutely irrelevant and usually illogical.
So why are Hasling’s handlers upset with Al Loma? Because he is an outsider and not part of the corrupt system that is D11. While Hasling and others will declare that Loma has some conflict of interest because he is obviously a supporter of charters, and therefore of parental choice, nothing but love and adoration are being thrown at the other new BOE member, LuAnn Long. Long has been entrenched in D11 for years, begging the question of her conflicts. BOE members serve to represent the tax payers, not the administration. Long has a history of fighting any proposed changes that would benefit either the tax payers or students of D11. The reason that she is receiving such love and praise is because her fellow board members and administrators understand that she will be yet another champion of the status quo. Don’t expect your child to become her priority by any stretch of the imagination. As far as Sandra Mann’s re-election, let’s just hope that D11 never requires a breathalyzer test to be administered to board members prior to meetings.
Equally as funny, in a sad sort of way, as Hasling’s statement is a letter written to the Indy by John (it’s all about me) Gudvangen. The best I can tell, Gudvangen attempts to praise himself and attempts to take credit for an improved D11. Gudvangen is big on talking about civility, and he performed so well in this category that current members of the BOE let him know that they would campaign against him if he ran for re-election. Gudvangen was literally one of the least trustworthy members of the D11 board, once declaring that he could not be accused of lying because, “Everyone has their own truth.” Spoken like a true Relativist. That would explain why Gudvangen can claim that graduation rates have improved under his watch, when in fact they continue to decline. This would explain why Gudvangen can claim to have achieved success as a BOE member when several thousand more students have fled the district under his watch. This would explain why he could declare at a BOE meeting that, “We will never have a discussion about closing schools under my watch,” and then lead the charge to shut down 9 D11 schools. This would also explain why Gudvangen would exclaim in front of other D11 parents that he had no sympathy for students in low performing schools because it was not his fault that “their parents made some bad life choices.” Spoken like a true leader, Gudvangen.
At least it is refreshing to see Hasling & Gudvangen leaving with the same attitudes that brought them to the board in the first place. Those attitudes include a total disregard for the truth, and a total lack of concern for students.
posted by Craig Cox | 1:50 PM
6 Comments:
Craig, Have you thought about sending this to the Gazette or Indy as a letter to the editor?
Obviously the new D11 school board: Al Loma, Louann Long, Sandra Mann, Charlie Bobbitt, Bob Null, Jan Tanner, and Tom Strand have no problem with a liar and a crook being their vice president. I would've never guessed that 4 of them would vote for her. I thought Tom would because he is a liar too. I'm surprized by whomever the other two are.
I've read and re-read the board policies and by-laws. Hasling is way off the mark - the director must profit from the relationship. Loma is a volunteer. The true irony is that she (Hasling) never considered pizzagate as a conflict. Good riddance to her!
Anony, I suppose the good news is that Tanner was not elected board president, which is what she wanted. I would like to think that Loma did not vote for Tanner for VP, and I'm sure Null did not vote for her. If I had to offer a guess, I would guess that Bobbitt would have probably voted for Null, but Long doesn't care about corruption; she never complained about it during her years in the district. You are correct about Strand - he just says what he needs to say with very little regard for truthfulness.
To the best of my recollection, all of the officer seats went unchallenged, save for that of the vice president. Charlie Bobbitt nominated Bob Null and cited all of the reasons why; after a short pause, Sandra Mann nominated Jan Tanner. Julie - the woman who does the meeting agenda and minutes, was voted assistant secretary, and Glenn was voted assistant treasurer.
This means it's Strand, Tanner, Long and Mann who are the Administration's status quo people; and whatever Null's role in the District's shameless theft of the Irving Village concept, it's cause to question where Null's loyalties lie, as well.
Sadly, this leaves only Bobbitt and Loma who might be counted upon to vote their conscience. Indeed, they are perhaps the only ones ever to have one, and I can only begin to imagine the amount of money that's supporting the progressive puppets and tempting the weak of constitution.
Spydra, I have always consider Null to simply be someone who just wanted to be elected to something. He ran around town trying to get himself elected to any position that he could find. His goal has always been to feel important as people lobby him for this issue or that issue. He is not grounded on any specific principles. He is most likely to do the bidding of administrators since they (especially Gustafson) are very good at sucking up to BOE members to make them agree to admin ideas. Null loves this type of attention. Look how he handled to Tanner situation - he complained about us in the paper, but behind the scenes, he emailed me and complained that the Gazette was not being thorough enough on the Tanner scandal.
Post a Comment
<< Home