The ballots have been mailed. This week, some 6,000 voters (5,000 who have little involvement in the schools) will be asked to vote on a recall based on retirement packages and how our new superintendent was hired.

Recently, The Press Democrat ran an article regarding the Sonoma Unified School District: “Sonoma Valley Unified hires superintendent from within.” Hmmmmmm.

The former Superintendent had lasted just over a year before resigning abruptly on a Monday. That Thursday the Board announced that the former director of curriculum would be taking over.

Hadn’t our new Superintendent been our district's director of curriculum and instruction?

Their rationale for the internal hire? “The interview process was brief…..Because the board has worked with (the new super) for four years and is very familiar with her.” Hmmmm.

Wasn’t that just what our Board said about hiring Dr. Haley?

Sonoma’s departing Superintendent had been the product of a national “Search.” She didn’t work out. Not because Sonoma didn’t try: She was thoroughly vetted.

They did their best. It just wasn’t a good fit. Outside searches don’t guarantee good results.

We did a national search five years ago and discovered the best small school Super in the State, Alan Gordon.

Sonoma was probably wise to hire from within. They used “Best practices.” Just as we did.

This entire awful period in our community came about because one attorney misconstrued the law. She thought the Board and Alan Gordon violated State conflict of interest laws (California Criminal Code 1090) and rallied a group of parents to garner 2000 signatures—all based on a an incorrect interpretation of the law. A complaint was filed with the Napa County DA and he found “No criminal conduct”, whatsoever--no Brown Act violations. Well meaning people gathered signatures under false assumptions. No crimes had been committed.

As Sonoma has demonstrated--no ethical violations.

Sonoma’s outgoing Super will get a nine months’ (75% of one year’s salary) severance. Alan Gordon gets 80% of one year’s salary paid out over five years.
Lavish? You decide.

However, our board was just doing what Districts do all over the state.

Check out L.A. They will save an estimated $20 million this year using Pars.

Or San Diego where over 1000 teachers and administrators participated in the PARS program. “The replacement of these senior employees with lower paid new-hires…will result in a projected savings of $11.5 million in 2009-2010 and over $32 million over the next five years.” according to Ken Leighton the Controller at San Diego USD.

Was Sonoma’s severance package an impeachable offense?

Was hiring a known quantity an impeachable offense in either Sonoma or St. Helena?

Maybe your bottom line is “A Pox on both their houses.” . Maybe no Superintendent anywhere, anytime deserves severance or a retirement package—-and maybe schools should never hire from within.

And maybe not. What we do know in St. Helena, is that the retirement packages for 6 teachers and two administrators are saving the district $1,244,000 over five years. That is beyond dispute.

(Now that Alan and Jim have left, Rob makes less than Alan, Stan makes less than Rob, Julie makes less than Jim. Each new teacher will be making less than the one they replaced. Businesses use retirement packages just like schools do. It is a tried and true method to “Buy out” long time high priced employees and replace them with more energetic, younger ones—generally—at a lower price).

It is not my job to defend Sonoma Unified. I know nothing about them. What I do know is that, like them, our local Board operated within the parameters of any Board anywhere in the State.

There has been no moral turpitude.

We have free elections every two years. There will be another election (for 3 seats) next November.

Four elections in two years? The Wall St. Journal attributes this type of selfish, instant gratification behavior to “Lawn Mower Parents” (they will mow down anything in their path to get an A for their kid or a spot on the team).

Our Chief Business Officer has just resigned, worn out by their insults to her professionalism and incessant demands for more "back up" and "more documentation." They insulted her by not using her figures for salaries and savings. They opted for inflated ones instead.

Shouldn’t we stand up to them—act like adults and defeat this recall?

If you haven’t made up your mind, or are unsure of the facts, consider giving the benefit of the doubt to those doing the heavy lifting. We owe them our gratitude—not our opprobrium. Our kids are lucky to have them. They’ve earned our support.