One more post

Here is my response to the BEA:

----- Original Message -----
From: Janet Suppes
To: smiller@washingtonea.org
Cc: Michelle Miller ; Gerlitz Dennis Gerlitz ; John Stokes ; Audrey Bennett
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 11:28 PM
Subject: Bellevue PTSA Council Meeting

Stephen,
I understand that you were not happy with how the meeting went last night. I figured it was just best to address this directly.

The purpose of the meeting was to learn about the BETF bills. PTA has been very involved in their development, and active in lobbying for them in Olympia. It only made sense to have someone come to our meeting and share with our members what all levels of our organization has been so excited and energized about. I appreciated having teachers there, since it is always a good thing to listen to all viewpoints and form your own opinions. These are complicated matters, and it isn't always easy to figure out the details just by reading the bills. It is important to have someone there to go through it. That's why we invited Barb to come speak.

During Barb's presentation, I expected that there would be questions, even challenging ones. What I didn't expect was the confrontational tone that was taken by you and a couple of other teachers. We were there to learn, not to get in an argument. You obviously had a different agenda. I was at a loss at one point, you were so far out of line, I wasn't sure how to get you to back off. Fortunately, Connie spoke up and made it very clear that you were out of order. You were invited to have a voice in our meeting. I was surprised that you used it to be so disrespectful to the membership. I wouldn't doubt that your tone is what led to such a lopsided vote to endorse the bills.

But the rudeness didn't stop there. During the meeting, you decided to have a loud whispering conversation with Barb. I finally had to tell you to please stop, it was disturbing the meeting. You made sure we all knew you were sitting there, and you made it clear when you were leaving. I would never presume to make such a spectacle of myself at any meeting.

So lets be honest. I saw the diatribe you wrote to John complaining about the meeting. I actually was not surprised. I figured you would take it that way, since it was consistent with the confrontational attitude you entered the room with. The meeting evolved in an unexpected way. We did not coordinate the last minute vote. We did not lie to you. How paranoid can you get? I have better things to do with my time than create plots and schemes to make a group of people angry. The vote was held according to our rules. I'm not sure where you got the notion that you had a vote, or could dictate what we propose or how we conduct our meetings. Yes, I cut you and Michelle off several times because you were launching into accusations and attacks, and were not adding anything constructive to the discussion. We had people who had substantive things to say, and they deserved to be heard. You had no right to dominate the conversation.

It is probably a good idea to have a presentation on 5607 and the current status of the bills. But don't count on it being you or anyone from the BEA. I am sure we can find someone capable of speaking to the issues and making an informative presentation.

The BEA decided to have a strike against an incredibly supportive parent community, and one of the best school districts in the country. The strike has caused a complete disruption of our school year, and made the scheduling of the snow days a hardship to many, especially seniors. The union got what it wanted, but it has a price. That price is a loss of trust and an erosion of support in the parent community. Fortunately, most of it is directed toward the union, not at the teachers. Parents still support their teachers, and are still active and involved in their schools. I would have thought you understood this, and would be going out of your way to be more conciliatory. That was not in evidence last night or in your email to John.

As I said, I was happy to have teachers join us last night. It was an opportunity to learn. I am still glad that we had so many there. You and the BEA are welcome at our future meetings. As you said, there is a P and T in PTSA. But the parents and the teachers are there for the Students, and to provide the best environment we can for our children. The focus is not on the P or the T.


Janet Suppes
Bellevue PTSA Council
President
janetPTA@gmail.com
425-445-3707

Endorse HB 1410/SB 5444

Endorse HB 1410/SB 5444

Here is John Stokes response:

From: ggstokes@msn.com
To: smillerred@aol.com; mmiller@washingtonea.org; kheiman@washingtonea.org
Subject: RE: Shame on You
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 18:04:04 -0800

Stephen,

It appeared to me that "we all" had not left the room before the discussion and vote. You left the front of the room (remember I was sitting at the very front seat by the isle on the left, and you personally may have left the room), but the BEA President and two teachers remained in the room until the end, about 9:30. Since you are no longer the BEA President, your presence was not critical, especially since Michelle was still there, and she and the teachers were very vocal and gave their side of the issue to the group.

Yes, I thought Connie was going to move the we endorse HB 1410 and SB 5444, but after she talked she said that she was not prepared to do that, and Janet said directly to you at one point that the time for debate would be under New Business. I realize that the agenda had the endorsement included under the legislative report, but that is not unusual for a subject to be brought up in a committee report and then voted on if needed later under new business.

Connie did not whisper anything to me. Dennis, however, leaned over and asked if I was going to move for endorsement, and I said yes. That was the sum total of all that was said.

I did not specifically know why the teachers were there last night, but since they don't come otherwise, I suspected it was about the endorsement. I did not know they were there to interrupt the speaker and try to debate specifics during her presentation.

I don't think it was a hollow vote at all, and certainly is on a par with BEA votes or better. PTA members, the parent consumers of your services, are barred from any of your meetings, and the discussions are all one sided. So please don't lecture me on "informed debate." As a matter of fact, the union president and the teachers were given voice in the discussion before and during the debate on the motion to endorse. And I remember the way any attempt to present the other side of the issue on the curriculum web was conducted in the meeting at International, even though the Bellevue PTSA Council Board had voted to co-sponsor the event in the interest of getting the discussion out in the open. As you know, I supported the board co-sponsoring the event even though I was criticized.

The accusation that you were "lied" to and that I "blatantly deceive[d]" the group of teachers and union members is dishonest and beneath you. Teachers were not shut out. You may have left too early for the actual motion and debate, but unless you are saying that Michelle is less able than you to handle these things, and that unless you personally are present the union is shut out, then you need to back off and apologize.

I personally would have no problem entertaining a motion to reconsider the vote to endorse next month, but I cannot speak for the council or the board. I believe the end result will likely be the same, because the Task Force bills are more closely aligned with the WSPTA's goals and priority issues than the coalition bill. I also think there is a lot of misinformation and outright distortion of the language and intent of the Task Force bills being given out, some of it voiced in the meeting, and I think the members see through that. I would be delighted to debate you over these bills at any time and any place.

Another point, it would be helpful to have the allegations the BEA officers and teachers are making about the effect of the Task Force bills written down, including the notion that the bills will cost one teacher "$10,000." Wild statements are being made without fact, or so it seems, and if we are to ever come to some agreement and understanding on this important legislation, we need to deal with the facts and the truth and not distortions. Until I see it in black and while and can check it out, I find many of the statements made last night to be pure fiction and scare tactics.

I have been a member in good standing of the National Treasury Employees Union since 1992, and until my recent retirement, I was the Regional Vice President and Chief Steward of our nationwide chapter, and for several years served as a National Steward and served on several task forces and committees with management as the union representative. I represented dozens of our union members in grievances, MSPB actions and EEOC actions, NLRB matters, as well as countless informal resolution efforts, and worked on several large nation wide grievances and contract bargaining efforts. I am still a dues paying member and also contribute to our PAC, and have attended several national NTEU training conferences. So union runs in my blood. I was not easily bullied and pushed by a recalcitrant management at the agency, and I will not be bullied by anyone in this matter.

I have seen a lot of bad management actions, and some bad union actions, and what I am seeing in this situation is as bad as any of these. I firmly believe that with some necessary amendments SB 5444 is by far the best legislative vehicle for advancing the level and success of our public school system, and that is will end up greatly benefiting teachers, the taxpayers and voters, parents, but most importantly, and the only real guide, the children. Working together we could make great things happen, continuing the guerrilla warfare will just defeat what is best for kids.

If you are willing to sit down and talk rationally, I would be delighted. If you want to have an open debate, count me in. But please quit trying to intimidate and bully us, and stick to the facts.

Frankly, I am glad you sent me your message, it has been good to say all this so you can see where I am coming from. We were friends, and I hope that was not just a situational thing.

Thanks,

John

Bellevue PTSA Council Endorsement

On Monday night, the Bellevue PTSA Council had a meeting. We endorsed HB 1410/SB5444. The BEA was not happy about that.

To: ggstokes@msn.com; mmiller@washingtonea.org; KHeiman@washingtonea.org
Subject: Shame on You
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 18:43:06 -0500
From: smillerred@aol.com

John,

I never thought I would see the day when you would so blatantly deceive a group of teachers and union members. Whether we agree or disagree on an issue, I don't expect you to lie to us about about a vote in the PTSA Council. Don't even attempt to hide behind the claim only Connie promised not to make a motion. What did Connie whisper to you once we all left the room?

You knew exactly why the teachers were at the meeting last night. Each time we tried to address the obvious flaws in the presentation and bill, you, Connie, or Janet tried to shut us down. Finally, Connie promised no motion would be made tonight in order to get us to stop debating with the presenter. If you disagreed with Connie's promise, you should have said so immediately. You didn't even have the character to make the motion once you reached that part of the agenda.

Is your goal to have informed debate on issues or to conduct hollow votes in a Council where less than 10 buildings were present to vote and teachers were shut out? Where is the T in the Bellevue PTSA? You complain no one gets involved in PTSA, but when PTSA members attend you exclude us from the debate and act in a deceitful manner regarding your voting procedures.

The only honorable thing to do is to ask BEA to make a presentation on this Bill at the March Council meeting and re-conduct the vote. Otherwise, you are sending a clear message to teachers that all you expect us to do is teach your kids and pay membership dues so the schools can earn membership certificates from PTSA. Oh, I forgot, you also find us useful when making Levy calls.

Frankly, why should we be belong to the Bellevue PTSA in this hostile and dismissive atmosphere?

Stephen

To the Seattle Times:

Finally, Paul Krugman has gone beyond the pale, and your paper has published a bigoted piece of trash. Way to go - your profits are tanking, so this must be a good time to call your Republican readers racists, and your minority readers wards of the state. What a complete insult. But did you even see it, through your bigoted lens?

Paul Krugman states that those who want small government, and believe that people should be able to keep what they earn, are racists. He comes right out and says it. We don't want to give our money to "Those people", Krugman states. "Those people" are black. Does it occur to either you or Krugman that minorities are equally oppressed by big government? His comment implies that all blacks are on the dole, and thus are hurt by tax cuts. Does he really think that only whites have jobs?

This is outrageous. I hope you print a retraction and an apology, and drop this bigot from your regular columnists.