https://vimeo.com/126328111 6:36
Tuesday night's shameful and personal attack by city employee Martha Grover against SC member CKK.
It's on us now, especially if we ever hope that good people will step up and run for office ever again here. Do nothing and guarantee that the school district will only get more of the same or Do Something and put an end to this abusive conduct and start turning things around.
Letters to editor
Public Comment 7 p.m. (moved by Driscoll after public pressure to beginning of meeting, before the Budget votes!) Tuesday, May 5
Bob Burgess
(781) 245-0080
26 Albion St
Wakefield, MA 01880
Jessica Sacco
Reporter
Phone: 978-739-8508
Email: jsacco@wickedlocal.com
Matt Reid
Editor
Phone: 978-739-1314
Email: mreid@wickedlocal.com
75 Sylvan Street, C 105, Danvers, MA 01923
Nell Escobar Coakley
Managing Editor
Phone: 781-393-1826
Email: ncoakley@wickedlocal.com
Marcia Dick
m_dick@globe.com
I think the only bullying being done here is your message above. A parent spoke at a meeting, quite respectfully, and you, anonymously, call her a bully and encourage everyone to alert the media.
"respectfully"
Can't spin that, no way. There was only contempt in that public address and how it came about. If it had been anyone else, they would have been gaveled for their personalization of their criticism.
Seriously, that is worth a newspaper write up? You are way too sensitive if this is so upsetting to you. The MelroseMessages crowd is sounding downright unhinged because one person dared to have a different perspective. Relax - I thought this is what you all wanted - a more open discourse of differing opinions. Trying to vilify someone who thinks differently makes you sound crazy. And it makes you sound like a cyber bully since you are doing it in an anonymous message board.
I read with interest the comments on the other string about this (below, cutting out a few of the least helpful or relevant). I agree that the public has been mostly silent and for too long. This parent certainly had a right to come forward and make a statement expressing her opinion (which I do not share), but personalizing it the way she did was crossing a big line, a line that was allowed by the chair and the rest of the committee. There are major discrepancies between what is easily observable about the mechanisms of the School Committee and what this woman stated as if it were incontrovertible truth. Whether one agrees with the member who was being criticized or not (I believe it was unfair and untrue), the way it came about deserves our attention nonetheless.
The Budget process is supposed to matter to us because it affects every single one of us. I do not find anything in the current process to have been user-friendly for the public, especially placing Public Participation at the end of the meeting, oftentimes at 9:40 or 10 p.m. Requiring electronic submission of questions may sound very sophisticated and user-friendly, but that should only have been offered as an adjunct means of communication, not what ended up being the sole means. With almost no one submitting questions (or the chair bringing forward nothing for weeks), this wasn't very successful. What was interesting is the large numbers of young parents who came forward in that first pre-Budget meeting, after a large PR effort to have them (as a selected body) appear. Certainly the views of senior citizens were not tapped in a similar way, which leaves one with the impression that our views were not desired.
That the parent who read that statement is also a city employee and appointee of the mayor makes it more troubling. This committee and superintendent have politicized what is never supposed to be a political thing, the oversight of the education system. This started with the previous superintendent, who even went so far as to appear at City Hall and Memorial Hall to sit with school committee candidates (his chosen ones) on election night. This is dead wrong. A certain amount of politics is unavoidable when volunteers (in a small town) run for office to sit on the committee or run for mayor, but this has taken on a completely sordid aspect the way it's done in Melrose, and it is not right. I find what has just happened deeply disheartening and worthy of our attention.
Disgraceful
Apr 29, 2015 - 9:39AM
Re: What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?
Does anyone else find it telling that whenever one of Dolan's cabal engages in nothing more than blatant character assassination, Dolan himself is conspicuously absent, as he was again last night?
CKK has no control over what gets published on the SC or City websites. If Ms. Grover wants to blame someone for unavailable documents from the 2014-15 budget process, maybe instead of pursuing an obvious personal vendetta, she should instead hold the person who is actually responsible for that publication accountable.
Not being content to only attack CKK, the thinly veiled slam of Mr. Mroz, was also quite disgusting. The level of nastiness and viciousness that this committee and it's henchmen and women engage in is not only disgraceful, but is very telling as well. Melrose should be completely embarrassed to have individuals of this low character representing them and making decisions about the future of our children, and we should be ashamed that we allow it.
Cheryl
Apr 29, 2015 - 9:59AM
Re: What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?
I saw that woman speak her little targeted diatribe at the start of the meeting. I got curious (should have read a book instead) and looked online. I watched all the way through to the end of the meetings on the last three videos, and so far it looks like there was literally no one who submitted questions to the superintendent to be addressed during that final "15 minutes" except that "one tired voice" who the chair censored and decided that his questions didn't merit answering. Other than that (and the ONE meeting where skads of parents asked nearly the same things with lots of rambling formulaic "answers") and the SPED mother who came to talk at the end of meeting Public Comment about what she wanted the district to do for her child, there was virtually no one. So is that what was supposed to be this supposedly "successful" process the woman ranted about? The online stuff looked cooked, all very formulaic and amateurish, with loads of errors, and obviously geared towards a predetermined endpoint. If you ask me, the whole thing was cooked, including the obvious political agenda of the rabid attack dog (who works for the city!). The whole thing is cooked for that override posturing, and sadly there are probably a lot of people who'll buy it.
Meanwhile, the proof in the pudding is there. That "tired" voice mentioned the number of MHS grads who had to have remedial skills training in college from a recent year. While others will stridently hurry to rub our noses in the tiny margin of students who get into the most selective schools, no one seems to care that a lot of the kids leaving our district after 12 to 13 years in the system haven't been taught or somehow didn't learn basic skills. It's a dark and dreary thing and it does make one tired. Thanks to those few who have kept fighting for the kids, though. What would we have without them?
Mr. AW
Apr 29, 2015 - 10:20AM
Re: What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?
Quote: Disgraceful
Does anyone else find it telling that whenever one of Dolan's cabal engages in nothing more than blatant character assassination, Dolan himself is conspicuously absent, as he was again last night?
CKK has no control over what gets published on the SC or City websites. If Ms. Grover wants to blame someone for unavailable documents from the 2014-15 budget process, maybe instead of pursuing an obvious personal vendetta, she should instead hold the person who is actually responsible for that publication accountable.
Not being content to only attack CKK, the thinly veiled slam of Mr. Mroz, was also quite disgusting. The level of nastiness and viciousness that this committee and it's henchmen and women engage in is not only disgraceful, but is very telling as well. Melrose should be completely embarrassed to have individuals of this low character representing them and making decisions about the future of our children, and we should be ashamed that we allow it.
I agree. This was shameful. Cabal is the right word for it, too, since this was obviously sanctioned. It is notable that the chair normally grabs her gavel and quickly shuts down any critic who personalizes with names, but this time she made sure to let it happen. Those individuals of "low character" have produced starkly troubling results (I believe they call it "student outcomes") for a number of years now. They certainly revealed more of their true colors, however, which is probably a silver lining since it helps elevate public awareness, and maybe even some lasting public outrage.
Disgusted citizen
Apr 29, 2015 - 1:26PM
Re: What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?
Quote: wow
Quote: The Answer
The simple answer to the posted question "What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?" is that Melrose apparently "wants" the school system it has now, if public engagement (and the lack thereof) is any indication. There is the proverbial proof in the pudding. If Melrose as a community wants something better, citizens/parents to get off their collective butts and do something (and no, selling flamingos doesn't cut it since MEF is mostly about guarding the gates and doing the bidding/singing the praises of those who have brought the district to its stellar status).
Yes, and that henchwoman (naturally a Dolan appointee/employee) speaking at the beginning of the meeting tonight was a perfect example. How ugly. But at least it shows what this woman and her associates are all about. Really gross.
Absolutely disgusting to see Melrose citizens' tax dollars funding the salary of the Mayor's personally appointed Energy Efficiency Manager (and now, RD attack dog) with her office spitting distance from RD's corner office. For a public employee to blatantly lie and turn on our most dedicated School Committee member and the committed members of our community who have been brave enough to come forward at school committee meetings (and ask the questions the rest of us are afraid to) is just disgraceful, and most certainly an ethics violation. Perhaps she needs to hear from the Citizens of Melrose about their disappointment in her abhorrent behavior.
Awesome
Apr 29, 2015 - 1:55PM
Re: What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?
I thought she was awesome. And now seeing the reaction from this board, I realize that my initial thoughts were totally correct!
Wicked Awesome
Apr 29, 2015 - 3:53PM
Re: What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?
Quote: Awesome
I thought she was awesome. And now seeing the reaction from this board, I realize that my initial thoughts were totally correct!
Yes, it was very awesome to see Robbie's personally selected municipal employee, who's salary is paid for with your tax dollars, embarrass our community by attacking our neighbors on local cable, and then blatantly lie and disparage the only school committee member we can count on to carry out her duties in a responsible and ethical manner. Well done Ms. Grover. Now that your dirty work is done, I think it is time to hit Robbie up for a raise on the taxpayer's dime. Very awesome, indeed.
8th gr parent
Apr 29, 2015 - 10:06PM
Re: What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?
Here's the video link:
https://vimeo.com/126328111 6:36
It is helpful to see just how ugly these people are willing to be because frankly I didn't believe it could be that bad until I saw it myself. Ms. G is a true reflection of the vindictive ignorance of some of the parents (and in this case a city employee to boot) who are keeping the political system afloat. What comes through here is unmitigated arrogance that now defines the way our school committee and administration operate. They don't care a whit about the damage they've done that is directly hurting the students. They don't even acknowledge anything as being wrong, or if they do, it's all blamed on a lack of enough money. Shame shame shame.
Sure Martha, bring it on with your disgusting character assassination and recitation of lies and mispresentations. You diminisheded only yourself in the process.
Sad
Apr 29, 2015 - 10:23PM
Re: What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?
Wow. You're right. I just watched the MMTV SC meeting. No exaggeration here. That is unbelievable. How embarrassing this must be for her kids, never mind our community.
parent
Apr 30, 2015 - 8:11AM
Re: What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?
Quote: Sad
Wow. You're right. I just watched the MMTV SC meeting. No exaggeration here. That is unbelievable. How embarrassing this must be for her kids, never mind our community.
Neither Mrs. K or her kids need to feel any embarrassment. They can feel proud that their mother has steadfastly fought for everyone else's kids all these years, even in the face of this abuse. This is about the poor character of the speaker, Martha, and those who not only allowed her to do this but who are part of the political Cabal that has tried to roll its administrative artillery over the education system and of justice here. This is the same bunch of bullies who look the other way when children are being hurt, too. Bad enough they do it to adults (as we can all witness), but they do it every day to students in a thousand ways, with direct action and indirect neglect, whether it's failing to follow up and do what IEPs require in anything close to a timely fashion or marching over the rights of teachers or allowing (even encouraging--when sanctioned by teachers and their bosses) overtly discriminatory conduct. No, Mrs. K can hold her head up high and know that she's always been fighting for what's right. The rest of them should be so ashamed, though that won't happen because that would require a conscience to begin with.
Parent
Apr 30, 2015 - 8:54AM
Re: What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?
I found it to be refreshing to have another opinion at that table. The speaker said she had 3 kids in our public school system so she has every right to speak. Also, I agreed with her points - I am not sure how the 9am weekday morning budget meetings were any more "open" and transparent than in previous years - they seemed to be contrived as a way for CKK to include her BFF GM into the budget making process even though the voters of Melrose were pretty clear they did not want him on the school committee. Does he even have a job? Not sure how he could attend the meetings? I know I was working while they were going on. In general, CKK seems to think she has a constituency of one - GM- and I know a lot of people that are frustrated about that.
There are plenty of other ways to provide outreach to the community on the budget process and the SC and admin have been doing a pretty good job using alternative outreach methods. I find it analogous to parent teacher confernces- what is more effective, a 10 minute session with your child's teacher one or two times per year, or an email dialogue with the teacher throughout the year letting you know how your child is doing. I personally would rather have the ongoing email dialogue then a five-minute face-to-face session. I think the school committee, and the administration, have done a good job providing alternative methods to reaching out to them, other then being forced to sit through the school committee meeting at the public comment session, and I fully support then in these efforts.
True colors
Apr 30, 2015 - 9:25AM
Re: What Kind Of School System Does Melrose Want?
There you are "Parent" with your Mean Girls bullying: "Does he even have a job? Not sure how he could attend the meetings? I know I was working while they were going on." How dare you! Is this kind of bullying what you teach your children?
"I personally would rather have the ongoing email dialogue then a five-minute face-to-face session"
What "dialogue"? This is a PUBLIC BODY and is supposed to conduct its business IN PUBLIC. Did you see any transcript for the questions submitted to those "15 minutes" on the agenda for questions submitted by the public? No, of course not. Because those questions, those few that might have been submitted, that is, (how would we know?) were only sent to and filtered/censored by MD. The rest of the committee never even saw them if what we've observed is any indication! Do you think that's correct? Do you think that constitutes a PUBLIC process? Surely you think all that OML stuff is just trashy nonsense, just like the rest of those who find it expedient to categorize it as such (until, that is, they find themselves outside a closed door when they might need information, information that is supposed to be public and readily available, or closed out of processes that affect your child or what you pay in taxes and fees, processes that were never supposed to be secret....). Do you think that Kristin Thorp had to "apologize" for violating the Open Meeting Law on public access TV recently because she wanted to or maybe perhaps because this was actually a serious business that even involved the city solicitor stating clearly that this had to be done? No, those trivialities don't outweigh the need to try and bolster the tarnished reputation of those bullies in the majority by viciously attacking the only ethical one in that chamber.
And do you really think you know what CKK did or did not try to do, do you even have a clue how many efforts were subverted by the rest of them? It was not her idea to bury things in Minutes; that was done directly by the chair and was contested by CKK numerous times in public (if you cared to pay attention--or maybe you know and just want to slander her anyway)! Did you hear the last 6 years how many times this person has asked the administration to place things online for the public? Are you even aware that those "packets" we now see for each meeting were a direct result of her efforts to make all information that was to be deliberated available to the public BEFORE the meetings and without an onerous Public Records search? No of course you don't know that, or maybe you do but just want to keep ignorantly slamming the efforts of this hard-working volunteer--OUR representative--who stepped up to do what no one else would? Instead you think this viciously personal and obviously political attack was "refreshing"! Nice.
Since you think anonymous posters are automatically cyberbullies, what's your name?
"Public Comment 7 p.m. (moved by Driscoll after public pressure to beginning of meeting, before the Budget votes!) Tuesday, May 5"
That is something. Would love to know what conversations took place around that. What disgusting arrogance that they would think it was ever appropriate to close off comments at the beginning before all the deliberation and votes happen and move that nuisance "Public Participation" to the end. Gross.
Wow, you people really are getting unhinged! One public comment session brings out all of this? I hope the original poster is CKK's husband because no one else should be getting so unraveled over one person's remarks!
Thank you for copying and pasting the opinions the 4 of you from that other sting, onto this one too, for an extra special effect. Just in case we had didn't get the original opinions from you from the first string. But trust me, we understand. For some reason, you are worked up regarding a single participant in the public comment session. But copying and pasting the same deranged messages from the last string onto this one makes you sound even more paranoid. It is not the end of the world that a person disagreed with your opinion on what is meant by incorporating public comments on the budget process. No need to alert the media, no reason to post dozens of crazed messages onto this board. We get it, she made you angry on behalf of CKK and GM. They should be very happy that they have such a loyal supporter in you. Now you can take a deep breath, relax, and try to enjoy the rest of your day.
"For some reason, you are worked up regarding a single participant in the public comment session." Well, gee, now that's special. Rob's minions are really busy trying to put out this fire it seems, especially since that "single participant" happens to be his female lackey, and he is by extension, tainted.
Lackey | Definition of lackey by Merriam-Webster
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lackey
Merriam‑Webster
a : footman 2, servant. b : someone who does menial tasks or runs errands for another. 2 : a servile follower : toady. See lackey defined for English-language learners.
She has 3 children in the Melrose Public Schools (she said 1 in the HS, one in the middle school, and one at the Hoover). So I think she has the right to speak as a parent, no matter what her profession is.
She absolutely does have the right to participate in the public comment segment. She does not, however, have the right to engage in a vicious personal attack against a SC member, actually using CKK's name at one point, during said comment segment. What would have been the response of the chair, do you think, had a speaker delivered the same type of character assassination directed at Ms. Driscoll? Do you think the chair would have sat idly by and not ruled such comments out of order and shut the speaker down? I can't decide which was the more disgraceful - the actual comments, or the chair's failure to put a stop to it. And these are the vicious, hypocritical crones making critical decisions about our children's education? Unbelievable.
Sure, she has/had a right to speak. As a city employee she also has the added responsibility of speaking truthfully and being especially careful not to cross ethical lines, which she did when she personalized her remarks and didn't say the whole truth but only instead the half-truths that fit her political agenda.
That is where we disagree because I don't think she had a vicious personal attack against CKK. If you are so into copying and pasting on this string, why don't you post exactly what she said that you considered to be so vicious and personal?
MG has a right to advocate for her children. She does not have the right to attack an elected member of the SC. Her performance was a role model for mean girl behavior. She showed that she definitely made a deal for her job, "insider status" and "played her part" according to her orders. As a member of MEF leadership team, she is part of the puppet brigade who does tricks on command.
Again, can you quote the "vicious attack" of which you speak? I heard her remarks and didn't see it. Why don't you post exactly what she said that you think was so vicious?
MG made very directed, personal attacks about how "disingenuous" Mrs. K is/was, and about Mr. M being the one "tired" voice Mrs. K caters to. She insinuated many very ugly things in her pointed diatribe. In the next breath she repeatedly praised Mrs. Driscoll and contrasted her with this "disingenuous" other member who "only" focused on the "minimum" required by the Open Meeting Laws (as if Ms. Grover even understands what those laws are about, and clearly she doesn't!). She repeatedly pointed to how hard Mrs. Driscoll had worked in contrast to what she characterized as a poor/minimal effort of Mrs. K. She criticized Mrs. K for not putting anything on the website from last year's process, whereas Ms. D has put much on, like the "Budget 101" document; she failed to state the other half of that--that the administration and Kristin Thorp made sure NOT to post the materials that Mrs. K produced, except in the most obscure places (like buried in the Minutes or agendas), which was purposeful, deliberate manipulation to make themselves look good at the expense of Mrs. K. (The same thing happened with the carefully prepared supporting documentation Mrs. K submitted for the Superintendent Evaluation that Mrs. K pointed out publicly were buried in Minutes and not linked to the Evaluation documents themselves. Thorp claimed this was because IQM2 wouldn't allow it any other way, but that's garbage. Somehow they manage to publish front and center the things they want us to see!)
This whole thing smells. It's in keeping with everything else we in the public have observed about the systemic dysfunction. But it's more than just dysfunction this time. This was an orchestrated and deliberate act by a mayoral appointee/employee who also happens to be a parent highly active in the Melrose Education Foundation to trash the reputation of a member of the School Committee on the specious grounds that she did not do her job, that she did not do outreach, that she is "disingenuous" about all she says and does. The criticism wasn't fair or accurate. It was globally leveled and did not represent the facts of the matter. "Operative" is a correct word for what this political agent was doing because she wasn't just there as a parent advocating for her children and community. That is clear as day. And that is shameful--both that it happened and that it was allowed.
Disingenuous. That is the worst word that she used? And tired? I would not exactly call either of those observations vicious attacks. As for the other insinuations that you have made up to "read between the lines" of what she said, it seems like you making inferences regarding the viciousness of her attacks because you didn't agree with her message. I wouldn't say she was trashing any one, or any process, any more than Mr. Mroz does during his public comment sessions week after week after week. It is just that she was directing it towards the one member of the committee that you happen to agree with. And she supported someone on the school committee who you viciously attack on this board on a weekly basis and this was upsetting to you too. I do understand, and I am sure CKK is very pleased to have such a loyal supportor. But don't characterize this as a massive political attack. It is a parent who had an opinion of the schools, much like Mr. Mroz is a parent who has an opinion of the schools, and who gave her opinion during the public comment period on Tuesday night. There was nothing in it that would trash CKK's reputation any more than the many comments made by those on this board about the other SC members. These are all public figures that have all had to endure some form of criticism at one time or another. I am sure CKK is strong enough to endure this and doesn't need the media to be alerted on her behalf.
I was in a public place where the mayor made a large spectacle of himself mocking and trashing this same SC member, snickering about how she's "done nothing" and calling her all sorts of things. This is what he does routinely, even to the ones supposedly on his side. What happened with his employee is just a more snidely worded version of the trash-talking he routinely does, and even using some of the same exact talking points. It is indeed an orchestrated manipulation, just not a very careful one. It's based in the cynical belief that the public will buy it, and I'm glad to see that there are some, at least, who do not.
If anyone wants to see the evidence of the hard work of that member, you might have to hunt for it, but it is plentiful and you can find it if you care enough to look. (Yes, it might be buried, but that's on purpose.) Better yet, ask her yourself.
I marvel at her composure for the rest of that meeting Tuesday, where she continued to ask thoughtful questions and didn't once sink to the despicable conduct that was leveled at her. Watching her interact with the superintendent, it was clear that she is all business, totally professional and about what's in the best interests of the district and the taxpayers, questioning carefully issues like the $240,000 being asked for more textbooks, and some sort of other bond issue yet to be disclosed at the Winthrop. It was easy to see that she still had spent more time thinking about the issues on the agenda than anyone else in that room.
Yes. CKK is a saint. I think we understand that you really support her. You should identify yourself to her in person, not just anonmymously on this board, so she knows how much you really love her. I think she'd be pleased to have such a loyal constituent.
His HR Director is actually a very nice person who backed his big ripoff raise a while back, and still he trashes her. He's a classless slug.
Opened my mailbox to find that this woman, Martha Grover, thinks so highly of herself and her statement that she had it published in the Weekly News. She had to have known she was going to have it published even before she spoke. So yes, the press should be seeking a balancing set of views, and even if they don't seek them (as they often don't), they should be sent in. Actually, a balancing article by the same paper should have been solicited for publication in the same issue, if anyone cared about responsible journalism, but that's a tall order these days. If the local media refuses to print alternate views, then more drastic measures should be taken.
So Phil, why don't you go ahead and write a letter in the papers?
I watched MG's dissertation on how well MD is doing as the committee chair. While she is entitled to her opinion as a parent, her employment by the city of Melrose brings her comments into scrutiny. Her whole comment was a cheerleading session, that bought little to the process. She ended with a personal attack on a sitting, elected official, and a former head of the committee. Again, she is entitled to her opinion. However, personal attacks are classless at best, and are counterproductive. She identified herself as a parent, but not once did she disclose her relationship as a city employee (I bet the other SC members knew however)
Yes, Editor. I'm sure they'll publish that right away, just like the article about the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights investigation of the Melrose School Department, the first Civil Rights investigation in Melrose that I ever recall. That would be front page news in any other community but not in Melrose. The Weekly is just another pretend-news outlet like the Melrose Free Press. Real journalists make a promise to protect the credibility of their work to earn the public trust. They don't ignore big stories just because it may be embarrassing for the local government or because they are aligned with the local pols as in this case.
There is an actual Federal Office of Civil Rights investigation of the Melrose Public Schools going on currently, as it was referenced in Thorp's "apology" for trying to cover it up by not listing it and the concurrent legal fees as required by law on the agenda February 12. There is an obvious cover-up that's going on all the way around when it comes to all the gross "errors" made by these elected officials and their paid employee, the superintendent, as Ms. K as been fighting to uncover when she's asked about the legal bills, the unlisted "settlements" of tens of thousands of dollars that are being paid out but appear no where in the financial documents (except when they have to "approve ongoing legal bills"--like the $10,000+ one for the Civil Rights investigation, or part of the cost, that is).
But then Ms. Grover probably agrees with her peeps there on the committee that these things should be covered up. Don't want anything "negative" out there after all, because it would limit the number of flamingos her Foundation could sell or houses Linda O could market. Better to fabricate things about the fake marvelous process then to reflect anything "negative" after all (like those pesky SAT or AP scores that are below the state level). No, we just wanna hear about the 1 or 2 kids that get into an Ivy or the football players that win a full boat to some school for their brawn (since it most certainly won't be for their SAT scores!).
The facts are a troubling thing. Right now this is all about positioning for the big Override announcement. Still, it doesn't make sense that Grover did this since her group is in the majority and has the votes. Strategically it would have seemed to make sense to ride that out and keep your nastiness to the coffee clatches (as we know this one in particular does with a vengeance). She besmirched herself, and whatever cause (feeding MD's ego?) she thought she was helping she in fact hurt. Really unseemly and dumb, to say nothing of the many other things wrong. Then again, it is America, and dumb nasty people are allowed to say dumb nasty things.
No Phil, if you writ a letter to the editor using your name, the newspapers will publish it. It is only this anonymous nonsense that they won't publish, rightfully so. It is not a conspiracy, it is the basis of how journalism works. Identify yourself, wrote a letter with an alternative point if view, and your letter to the ecotour will be published.
Grover touted that silly "Budget 101" thing as if it was the Second Coming, along with a lot of other worthless things. Only the most naive and inexperienced young parent could possibly think that bilge constituted anything worthwhile. It was all a snowjob to cover over all the obvious incompetence of those managing the finances, along with their slippery slide towards more bonding and an override. Sheesh!
The Melrose Free Press will never print it. To find out why, just look at today's issue on page A10 (A Reporter's Bittersweet Sendoff)and you'll understand why you only see fluff pieces about the schools and city government, but still no reporting on the first Federal Civil Rights Investigation of the School Administration, or the School Committee chair's most recent OML violation to cover it up. A real local news outlet would be all over these stories. Good luck to the reporter on her second public relations job.
I agree that it is way past time for members of the community to step up and make our voices known (and I will be doing so, rest assured). This recent act of a city employee was inappropriate in many ways. But so are the acts of our elected officials who have not only allowed this, but probably solicited it. They can continue to try and marginalize the rest of us, but this, too is being observed carefully. Even the more moderate among them should be cautioned that their actions are being weighed and quietly scrutinized.
Wow, I just read all of this, and because of the comments had to find the letter and statement in question. I think that Ms. MAH, Mr. TK, and their friends are really over-reacting here. There have been many other, in fact most other, public comment sessions where the other members of the school system and the administration have been frequently criticized during open comment session and this hasn't been a problem. But one person says something different and now there are 7 separate strings deriding a statement. People really are sounding way too crazy about the issue.
" I think that Ms. MAH, Mr. TK, and their friends are really over-reacting here."
And there you go, making it precisely clear who you are and what you are about. Luckily you can't put this fire out quite so easily. Neither of those individuals were posting. Lots of "new faces," as Ms. G made haste to point out, only in this case it's lots of new readers and posters.
No, it is the same posters who always rant on these threads.
Sorry “Junk” but I’ve been on the sidelines for this one and I haven’t been drinking. However, I am having a hard time reconciling the comments in the letter and the reaction and characterization of those comments. Do all the posters here realize that everyone has the chance to read the letter for themselves? I did not see anything toxic or personal in those comments; it was simply one citizen’s evaluation of SC members’ activities.
As far as I can tell, the letter made two comments with regard to CKK. First she said that CKK strongly criticized the process this year. Would anyone disagree with that? My guess is that CKK herself would call that an accurate statement and may even consider it a compliment.
Next she said that CKK made no effort to conduct outreach, beyond the minimum requirement s to the public, parents, etc. Despite all of the outrage on multiple strings here, I have not noticed any actual examples of outreach that CKK provided for this budget process. Does anyone have specific examples that they could share? That may alleviate some of the tensions here.
CKK was the one who opened to the public the finance committee meetings which were always held behind closed doors in prior years. It was too bad MMTV didn't televise them. Under current regime, they no doubt occur in secret again - haven't seen any on the city agendas page since Thorpe replaced CKK with Driscoll.
The outreach Grover gushes over only manipulated the usual line-up of eager and naive early elementary parents. As always, they followed the Driscoll script and demanded funding for what she thinks is the most critical need in Melrose schools - elementary library media specialists. Just like all other years it did nothing for the budget or students' education.
I think the "Norms" themselves should be sent to the AG's office to be reviewed for violation of open meeting laws and Freedom of Information Laws.
By requiring all SC member's information requests to be screened and "legitimized" by the Superintendent of Schools and the School Committee Chair for "legitimate educational interest", Kristen Thorpe and the Super have effectively been able to, at will, deny reasonable access to relevant information regarding our schools.
"Information requested must have a legitimate educational interest for the Committee and fall within their roles and responsibilities". "The Chair, in concert with the Superintendent, will determine the form of that information and how it is best provided in a timely manner, such that it reflects the committee’s roles and responsibilities. Committee members can request additional information through formal public records requests, or by a vote of the full committee."
So let me get this straight: Kristen Thorpe and the Superintendent of schools can willy nilly deny school documents to my School Committee members, citizens we voted for to protect our interests?? Now you know why for months the Super and K Thorpe have been able to deny Carrie K access to relevant legal invoices (paid for on your dime)related to the now public (and embarrassing)DOE Civil Rights Investigation. And you can just imagine who the targets are.
They explicitly deny individual school committee members the right to request relevant school related documents, requiring approval of the SC Chair (if you can believe it) to determine whether the request has a "legitimate educational interest". Meanwhile, you've got Maureen Driscoll and Kristen Thorpe sending libelous letters on behalf of the entire school committee (without their knowledge or consent) to top State Department of Education officials, condemning the Mystic Valley Charter School, (never mind that hundreds of parents choose to send their kids there to escape the MPS sinking ship), outrageously claiming MPS provides a better product (wow). Curious that Carrie K. requested that letter be made available to the public, but K Thorpe will make sure that it never sees the light of day.