The D11 Fact Sheet

There is much disinformation and misinformation circulating around the School District 11 community. Much of this misinformation is being spread by those who are intent on maintaining the status quo. This blog will set the record straight and it will educate the public on the identities of these defenders of the status quo.

Monday, November 23, 2009

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.

Sunday, November 08, 2009

Clean Sweep

No one who is familiar with D11 ethics is surprised to learn that the administration has declared that Jan Tanner has neither violated the spirit nor the letter of the law with her decade’s old money making scheme with the school district. After all, look back just two years and remember how CFO Glenn Gustafson quickly declared ex-labor union boss Irma Valerio “not guilty” of felony theft of tax payer money after she stole funds from D11 and from her own union treasury. The district also declared itself clean after investigating its own practice of handing tax payer funded vouchers to at least eight employees and anti-parent board member Karen Teja, all while using tax payer dollars to fight against vouchers for not-so-connected moms and dads across the district. To give the appearance of validity to the district’s investigation of itself, it publicly states that it brings in “independent” legal experts to look into the matter in question. In the case of the Teja vouchers, and in the most recent case of the Tanner pizza dynasty, D11 brought in Denver area attorneys to declare that the district and leftist board members in question were completely clear of any wrong doing. Take that “independent” opinion with a healthy grain of salt. If the law firm hired to find Tanner to be clear of wrong doing was hired by D11 law firm Holmes, Roberts, and Owen (HRO), just as was the law firm hired to find D11 clear of wrong doing in the Teja voucher scandal, where is the independence? If D11 or its attorney is paying another law firm to look into D11 matters, then D11 is essentially the client of the “independent” law firm, and law firms who want future business tend to base their conclusions on the wishes of the client.

So why would D11 have an interest in declaring that Tanner did nothing wrong? The answer is simple – D11 is also in the wrong. Former Procurement head John Elliott, whose wife Linda ran the political campaign for Tanner and who has been friends with the Tanners for years, handed the Tanner businesses a very lucrative pizza contract that lasted more than 10 years without ever placing that contract up for bid until two months ago. That is much more than a small oversight. The fact that Tanner never publicly disclosed her conflict of interest shows clearly that she knew that she was in the wrong for several years. Neither Elliott nor Gustafson have been asked by Superintendent Nick Gledich to address their roles in this matter, and the pliable Gazette reporter who covers (for) D11 can’t quite get the nerve to dig deeper. Having written that, I will give reporter Sue McMillin credit for objecting when the D11 board adjourned into executive session to discuss the matter of elected official Jan Tanner at the November 4th work session (for those who watch video of D11 board meetings, D11 has edited out McMillin’s objection).

By law, public bodies must meet in open session, with very few exceptions. One exception that a public body may use to meet in private is to ask for legal advice on a specific issue. Board member Tom Strand made the motion for executive session on November 4th, and in his motion, he declared that the purpose of legal advice was to receive advice on conflict of interest. If the board simply wanted advice on the definition of conflict of interest, there was no legal authority for them to have retreated into executive session. The advice must be for a specific question. Since Gledich released a statement following the meeting that Jan Tanner was clear of wrong doing, that specific advice must have pertained to Tanner. If the board was seeking advice regarding Tanner’s actions, then why was Tanner in the executive session? Further, since Tanner was the topic of discussion, the BOE had no legal authority to discuss her actions in private. Tanner is an elected official, which means that she is not covered by the “personnel” exception to open meetings laws. HRO gave that very advice to our board when questions about Eric Christen’s background were raised by Karen Teja. The tape recording of the executive session from November 4th is public record not protected by state law. Don’t hold your breath waiting for Sue McMillin to request a copy of that tape.

Don’t be fooled by the praises heaped on D11 by the Gazette editorial of a few days ago. The editorial pointed to an “unqualified” opinion given for D11 financial accounting - which is a good opinion. This was simply an external audit, which is conducted annually. External audits are focused only on the accounting practices used by the district. The auditors determine if Gustafson is using proper accounting practices to keep the district books. He is. Every column lines up properly and 2+2=4 in each instance where it should equal 4. Unfortunately, Gustafson and his board allies have refused to allow for an internal audit to be conducted on D11’s books. His reason is that this will be costly. Internal audits are not the friend of someone with something to hide. These audits are the friends of the owners of D11, who are the tax payers. Internal audits are those that turn up fraud and waste if they exist. Why is Gustafson so opposed to them, and why does Gustafson consistently refuse to speak out against the Irma Valerios and Jan Tanners and Karen Tejas? Gustafson has an interesting history with D11, and this history might provide clues for the answer to that question.

Spydra has even more on Tanner’s inflated income from her Inflated Dough business with D11. Read it here at http://spydrasweb.blogspot.com/2009/11/ill-apologize-in-advance-for-regularly.html.

Monday, November 02, 2009

What a surprise

The National Education Association, the parent organization of the Colorado Springs Education Association (which is funded by D11 tax payers), has a recomendation or two for your reading pleasure: Saul Alinsky. To think that this radical leftist organization is really about helping kids....

See the recommendation here: http://www.nea.org/tools/17231.htm.

free html counters
Circuit City Discounts