Two links today about my alma mater district. First, this one from an incumbent running for the school board. It includes the same tired and incorrect assertions about the additional transition being good for students. What's funny to me is that prior to her running for the first time in 2008, when the board was considering closing an elementary school and creating a middle school, she contacted me. I'd done some writing on what a bad idea the additional transition would be. This made the faction that was brewing court me, because they were delighted with my credentials and thought I would provide ammunition to justify their agenda. I distinctly recall she thanked me for being "on the side of the angels."

Well, it turns out that her high fives to me over my stance on transitions was just cover and these particular angels were motivated solely by self-interest. The challengers did not care about the district as a whole, educational excellence or fiscal responsibility; they only cared about saving their community school at all costs. Her defensiveness in this letter is ironic. They were quite emotional in 2008 -- seemed to believe the sky was indeed falling.

Then there is this depressing story. Here the superintendent shares something with the faction that hand-picked her to be their rubber stamp; she is on the defensive. How come the changes she implemented that she says addressed this problem took place before the incidents and complaint?

Later: Taking a big risk. Well, not really -- but putting myself "out there" in a way I haven't in a while. Worked on it today...stay tuned.