Moanalua Elementary School PTO
Home > SCC December 16 Meeting Notes

SCC December 16 Meeting Notes

Dear MES ohana,

Last night’s tremendous turn out by parents, staff and teachers to the MES SCC budget meeting is proof that our ohana cares about our school.  Many who turned out are active volunteers with school events and with the PTA, and were eager to participate, in the budget discussion.

I know many wanted to attend, but could not, so here are my notes from last night’s MES SCC budget meeting (Dec. 16, 2008).

We were met at the meeting door by bright orange fliers informing us of a new procedure to limit discussion.  A sign up to offer testimony was required, and a time limit imposed were just a few restrictions that made attendees uncomfortable from the start with the evening’s discussion process.

The first order of business was the approval of the December 8, 2008 SCC minutes.

  1. The controversy that erupted over making corrections to the minutes as reported by the Classified Staff enforced the fear that there is an influence to sanitize the minutes to NOT accurately document the events of the previous meeting.
  2. The SCC informed parents that the approval of the minutes is for the SCC board, and not open for discussion.  Parent concerns over the minutes may be brought up during the discussion phase of the meeting.
  3. The refusal by the SCC to listen to a staff member (directly involved in the misrepresented discussion on the minutes) who wanted to offer testimony to correct the inaccurate minutes sent a clear message that her input was not appreciated.
    • The minutes do NOT record the initial error in reporting the Classified vote.
    • The minutes do NOT record the discussion that followed, when the error was brought up by a Classified staff in attendance.
    • The minutes sanitize the process, and simply state the outcome.
  4. An amendment was made but it still did not accurately document what transpired.
  5. The procedure to amend the minutes was biased.  When Mr. Tom (community rep) corrected errors in his portion of the minutes, it was accepted right then and there.

Teacher representative reported on the following votes:

  • Majority in favor of not forming an ad hoc committee to function as the AC: therefore keeping the AC on the AFP and placing the grade level teacher on the supplemental list.
  • Majority in favor of cutting 3rd grade and NOT Kindergarten.

Parent representative reported:

  • It is in the best interest of the parents to support resident and current GE students, NOT future GE students.
  • Recommends getting SCC information out 1 week prior to meetings so parents have adequate time to review.
  • Acknowledged ongoing work with a parent to further develop a method to facilitate direct feedback from parents.

Community representative reported:

  • Legislators are aware of our meeting and would attend if possible.

Principal reported:

  • Reminded attendees of the holiday school schedule, and upcoming planning and development dates.

Classified representative reported:

  • Agree with teacher’s outcome regarding the AC ad hoc committee formation.
  • Majority in favor of cutting Kindergarten and NOT 3rd grade.

Discussion:
This phase of the meeting was very confusing for the attendees because the SCC reinforced multiple times that you needed to sign up for testimony in order to address the board.  Attendees were instructed on the rules of participation, and told certain subjects were NOT to be discussed, and that only “new” ideas could be brought up.

  • We did not know if we could ask a question. Because when we did, we were told “this is not the time for questions.”
  • We did not know if we could ask for clarification.  Because when we did, we were told “this is not the time for questions.”
  • We did not know if we could comment on a discussion.  Because when we did, we were told “this is not the time for questions.”
  • We could not bring up concerns because we were limited to “new” ideas only.
  1. Attendees concerned that the SCC is limiting discussion.
  2. SCC reminded all that the AC position is not up for discussion.
  3. When asked if the AFP has to be passed, Ms. Arai said YES.
  4. Request made to amend minutes to reflect Custodial response to possible cuts in staff to include “union stipulation” as reason not to cut staff.
  5. Request made to have Classified staff minutes corrected with testimony.  SCC responded to have it brought up later.  It was never re-addressed. The issue is the documented exclusion of what actually transpired during the previous meeting.
    • Classified staff mis-reported their vote by not supporting keeping Kindergarten funded and cutting GT.
    • This error was brought up by a Classified staff in attendance, and a discussion followed.
    • It was determined there was an error and the correction made to the reporting of the Classified vote.

    In the end the information is correct, but the steps taken to get there has been deleted from the official record.

  6. Question over where funds to re-key will come from:  Ms. Arai reported, $12,000 from community resource budget, $2000 from 2008-2009 SBE WSF budget, and $3000 from admin funds.
  7. Parent concern to SCC parent rep that he is obligated to represent the parents.
  8. Ms. Arai acknowledged and thanks the volunteer SCC board, and other parents.
  9. Concern voiced over ballots (teacher and classified) not returned, how this will affect the outcome of the votes.  Ms. Arai asked the affected reps to address this concern.
  10. Request from parent to have a document comparing the current vs new AFP so it is easier to see where the changes are going to occur.  Ms. Arai’s responded and reiterated that “changes are reflected in supply cost NOT personnel cost.”  Then at the last minute when the discussion was moving on, she quickly added “except 1 more position.”  This crucial point was glossed over.
    • There are more than one personnel position that is being cut!  Clearly an effort to mislead parents.
  11. GE parent concerned that her interest was not being represented by the SCC parent rep. because she was not contacted by the SCC.
  12. Parent upset by the lack of effort on the part of the SCC to publicize and communicate the important nature of these meetings.  Stated she found out through a friend and found information on the PTA website.
  13. When asked why parents were not informed through the usual means with a paper flier, the parent rep reported he could not send out a paper flier with the children because the SCC does not have the budget to do so.
  14. Ms. Arai said this is a “learning process” and will work on better communication.
  15. Parent asked for background information regarding the ad hoc AC committee vs the AC position.
  16. Ms. Arai requested correcting to AFP: should reflect 3 SpEd teaches and 3 SpEd EA not 4 each.  1 for pre-school, 1 for K-2, and 1 for 3-6.
  17. Clarification that AFP reflects the loss of 1 grade level.  Grade level has not been determined, but Ms. Arai “hears bring back K.”  Reduce grade 3 by 1 teacher.
  18. Parent request a discussion for grade level cut to take place.  Need to get parent input in this process.
  19. SCC stated “there was no opposition to the AFP during the testimony opportunity” so the AFP will be put to vote.
  20. Parent objection over this statement because parents were instructed that only “new” ideas could be discussed.  To state there is no opposition to the AFP is clearly wrong!
  21. Parents were mislead that this meeting would allow for discussion.
  22. Objection over the validity of the SCC voting when the parent group did not have the opportunity to go over the newly presented information.
  23. The AFP passed unanimously.

I have never seen so many parents, staff and teachers so visibly shaken and disturbed.  I can understand the need to keep order during a meeting, but we are not an out of control mob.  We are concerned MES participants and we were gagged, bound and tied.  To manipulate the format of the discussion, to confuse, discourage, and prevent input is unethical.

To those who attended, I am ashamed that our school would treat you in such a disrespectful way.  Unfortunately this reinforces the concern of many that “they will do what they want to do.”  I am so sorry, your participation should not have been “rewarded” in such a manner.

I know you are upset, and feel there is no recourse.  But please trust me.  I will get you heard.  Email me your concerns, I will ensure your anonymity and I will make our concerns known.

It’s hard not to be discouraged, but as we tell our children, “don’t give up!”  They need you to fight for them.  Show them how to persevere and to stand up for what is right.

Thank you,
Lori Shimoda
MESPTA president
lshimoda@moanaluapta.org