Once again we have had to set up a new SAUSD corruption thread as the last one started to run slow with all the comments on it.
Our schools are in crisis today – not just here in Santa Ana but all over the state. The only thing we know for sure is that we are going to take more budget hits.
I am amazed that the SAUSD hired back all their laid off administrators. How crazy is that? Class sizes are growing, good teachers are laid off, and the union, as usual, is asleep at the wheel.
We will continue to reason through all this here at the Orange Juice blog! We can but hope for the best…
I’m energized. That’s primarily because Wilson has had a GREAT principal for the last two years who understands motivation is far superior to denigration.
tell that to the economy
While teachers were on vacation look who sold them out and once the money is all gone everything remains the same. Pay for performance is here.
Santa Ana Board of Education and Teacher’s Union Agree To Pursue Race To Top Reforms
Santa Ana Board of Education and Teachers’ Union Agree to Pursue Race to Top Reforms for Improved Student Achievement
SANTA ANA, CA – January 7, 2010 — At a special Board meeting held today the Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD) Board of Education unanimously approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that signifies its intention to participate in California’s application for Race to the Top (RTTT).
The competitive one-time federal grant funding being offered to selected states as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act aims to improve academic standards and assessments, expands the use of data to guide instruction, requires improvements at low performing schools, and includes student achievement data in teacher and principal evaluation. The legislation enabling California to compete nationally for the funding has been signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. School districts have until the close of business on January 8, 2010, to submit their MOU expressing their intention to participate.
“Participation in RTTT will allow us to partner with the State in building the necessary reforms to positively impact academic achievement of our students. We will work with our teachers and union, as well as parents and the community to implement the program fairly and equitably,” said SAUSD Superintendent Jane Russo.
“While we value this opportunity, RTTT funding is not enough to fix the structural budget problems faced by local school districts. We are applying because we believe that our collaboration with the State will enhance our work and provide the opportunity for us to be a part of building the foundation for educational reform in our State,” Russo continued.
In the draft plan provided by the State of California’s Department of Education, the three goals of the State’s vision for academic improvements have been in place at SAUSD for three years. The State’s indicators for performance evaluation include:
Mathematics and literacy achievement in the early grades
(SAUSD’s Goal: Reading comprehension by Grade 3, and achieving English proficiency by Grades 4 and 5)
Mastery of Algebra 1
(SAUSD’s Goal: 8th grade Algebra success)
High school graduation rates
(SAUSD’s Goal: Passing the California High School Exit Exam and high school graduation.)
SAUSD educates approximately 55,000 students at 63 dynamic school sites throughout the Santa Ana community. The K-12 school district is the largest in Orange County and the second largest employer in Santa Ana, with approximately 5,000 educators and staff members. Contact us at 714-558-5555, or pioinfo@sausd.us. Visit the school district online at http://www.sausd.us/.
###
Race to the Top Presentation given to the Board of Education at special study session.
Race to the Top SAUSD & State Aligned Goals.
Angela Burrell
pioinfo@sausd.us
(714) 558-5555
© 2010 Santa Ana Unified School District
Questions or Feedback?
Terms of Use | TRUSTe Approved Privacy Policy
Copyright ©2002-2008 Schoolwires, Inc. All rights reserved.
CTA President David Sanchez said he’s urging local union chapters not to sign memorandums of understanding on Race to the Top because the state hasn’t provided enough detail on what its application will say.
“It’s crazy for them to think that we were going to go out on a limb and sign something off without knowing what the final product is going to look like,” Sanchez said.
745
SAHS teacher says:
December 13, 2009 at 7:18 pm
Trex & Rogue, Competition is, in fact, the mother’s milk of excellence. The main competition arena for public schools is school board elections. It’s the community putting up wise and dynamic leaders onto the school board that will force changes to the status quo of mediocrity that characterizes Santa Ana schools today. These type of leaders haven’t yet been stepping up to compete in elections.
Response to SAHS teacher: The teachers union has played a significant role in electing certain school board members. One that comes to mind is Audrey Noji. The community has been saddled with this board member for nearly 20 years! Is SAUSD any better off since she became a board member?
As far as leaders stepping forward . . . historically the teachers union, as well as Pulido’s well greased Chamber have made it virtually impossible to get good qualifed leaders.
What other mayor uses the Fire & Police depts. to do Pulido’s canvassing of the city in favor of the mayor’s candidate? That’s why we’ve got Rob Richardson.
Good candiates is NOT the only problem; Pulido and his well oiled machine is a mjor obstacle. Couple that with the teacher’s union, Chamber, Fire & Police, getting in lock step with the mayor’s agenda and that’s enough to scare any good candidates off.
I hope they go 50 to 1 + 2 minimum wage aids in elementary. That will teach the teachers not to reduce their salaries for the good of education.
Ryan,
I don’t understand your logic.
You “hope” for classes of 50 students? Obviously you have never been in an elementary classroom with 50 students and you don’t care about students receiving a quality education.
You want to “teach the teachers” that it is up to them to “reduce their salaries for the good of education”. Perhaps you haven’t successfully completed five years of college, endured two years as a probationary teacher, been fingerprinted, and had to complete hundreds of hours of graduate level coursework every few years to keep your credential or you might not be so quick to lay the state/federal educational economic crisis on teachers. Teachers did not create this problem, politicians did…maybe THEY should be the ones who give up some of their salaries since they are the ones who aren’t being effective in their positions.
Be careful what you hope for…
Is that why the districts best is being paid over $200,000+ (ie. Jane Russo)??
Ryan,
All superintendents (good or bad) in this area (So. Cal., probably all of CA) get that salary, plus car, etc. – as far as I know!
50:1 AND 2 aids? Actually, that doesn’t sound too bad!
Ryeann, SA Teetchur, and…
aids = acquired immune deficiency syndrome
aides = assistants
Whatever……..
Aid
–noun
4. help or support; assistance.
5. a person or thing that aids or furnishes assistance; helper; auxiliary.
Approval of the Site Plans got pulled from last Tuesday’s Board agenda. I know some people at my site, including myself, have some issues with the District taking almost all of our EIA-LEP funds (for LEP students) and EIA-SCE funds (for low-performing students) to use for CSR. Besides Greenville, I’m aware of some concerns at Esqueda as well. Our School Site Council is still working out the Site Plan, which is something of a challenge, not having money for interventions, staff development, etc. Does anyone know what’s happening at other sites, if any other sites have had issues with the District using EIA money for CSR instead of CSR money?
Whatever happened to the whole issue regarding the district holding out on 93 million dollars??? That issue has seemed to fade away from SAEA. I can’t even find it on the SAEA website and there is no explanation about what happened?? This seems so typical of SAEA lately! They can’t even follow through with things, they just fold whenever the heat comes on! Can we please get someone new at SAEA who can stand up for us and communicate with us on a daily basis!! I don’t even think they’re experienced or have the know-how to defend us against the district! Are they even negotiating for us or are they just walking up to the district office and nodding their heads because they’re too inexperienced to defend and stand up? They take our money, hide, and copy and paste crap on their website.
SA teacher,
yea, I heard the 50:1 from another teacher at my site. Hey it would save money because you could fire (layoff) 50% more teachers and hire a bunch of lazy high school graduates to for $7 an hour for 3.5 hours a day with no benefits. That would save the district TONS of money and guess what we could keep our salaries and Jane could too!!
I’m a bit confused regarding how SAUSD can lay off so many employees with possible expectaions for more in 2010-2011 when they are hiring for a brand new position within the Research and Evaluation Dept? The position (User Services Analyst), pays alot for what it is. They have several anaylsts already employed and just hired another brand new analyst position last Oct/Nov (??). I heard that the job description for that position was not really what they wanted but that they had to go through the process and hire for this postion anyway.
They went on to say that they were going to create an additional position to do the duties that were meant for the original new analyst position that was hired back last Oct/Nov. Only during the interview for this new positon, they mentioned that the duties for THIS NEW Analyst positon, were different than what was advertised. Huh! It sounds to me like they do not really know what thay want or really what they need. And in the meantime, they are on a hiring splurge while teachers are being or in threat of being layed off. How is that fair!
This new postion is clearly an overpaid position for what the duties really are. I mean come on, you really need to add another overpaid analyst to be a go between software/program users (school/district) and the IT dept? From my understanding, this person will go out to the sites and take note of what users need and relay that info to the IT dept? Is the IT Dept so swamped they can’t handle that themselves? It just baffles me that they can waste money trying to create the right postion. However, it seems like they keep on hiring new people until they find the right fit for what they want. It is obvious they don’t know what they want at the expense of teacher loss! If I worked at that district I would certaintly be outraged, especially if I was a teacher with a possible pink slip hanging over me.
I have not been on this site in a while. I am one of the 80 plus teachers who is still laid off. I have heard that they plan to layoff more teachers. Susan has not kept me informed of my status with SAUSD. She did not do a good job fighting to get teachers back. I remember she sent out a paper that had a list of things that teachers would be willing to do. Well hmm I wonder what happened to that? I am tired of not knowing anything from the union. By the way, I also refuse to sub still because I still make more in unemployment. I will not let SAUSD use me to sub for little to no pay. Several of my teacher friends who are still laid off too are still not subbing either. I WANT SOME ANSWERS FROM THE UNION!
One more comment I have to add. As for 50 students and having 2 instructional assistants as they are now called in the classroom is just wrong. Even the most highly qualified teacher would have a hard time teaching the class. I know it is done in college with classes larger than 50, but that is to students who already have an eduction and know how to learn things on their own. As for the 2 assistants in class, they are not qualified to teach students. They would end up teaching many students which is not right. If they are not qualified to be in the classroom alone, what makes them qualified to teach students?
To still laid off,
Have you taken a look at all the qualified teachers at the privates schools?? They all teach kids and they supposedly are all successful (part-time moms who don’t feel accomplished). In reality all you need is one qualified teacher in the classroom to manage the whole room. Now your “instructional assistant” can be anyone with a high school degree who just follow your lead. If that was done then the district would save tons of money on staffing. Imagine a room where you take 25 students and your assistants take 12 each to work with in small groups, have these groups rotate and you’d have yourself a pretty good working system. Trust me the aides don’t need to be THAT qualified because you’d be the one who would oversee and evaluate their instructional effectiveness. If you hire high school graduates you can be pretty certain that they’ll work with you because they have no knowledge of unions and rights.
The union has no interest in getting jobs back for teachers who are laid off. Susan is more interested in pursuing that stupid grievance over the worthless buy back days. If the union weren’t pushing that, maybe the district could have spent the buy back day money to hire back the laid off teachers.
#771,
I concur, let the “buy back days” go! I am VERY willing to give up three days pay in exchange for not having to endure those mind-numbing, superfluous, insufferable inservices.
#771,
Yes, “buy back days” are worthless. Every teacher at my site is more than happy to give up three days pay just to avoid those insipid inservices.
Give it up, Patricia. No one listens to you. Last year, you were advocating for CSR & now you want the money to be taken away. Be thankful you have a job & shut up!
I was going to say the same thing to Patricia. When Patricia realizes that we need to get ride of who we have in the union then things will be resolved. SAEA needs to be more communicative, you only hear from them every few weeks. We give them part of our checks people!!! They SHOULD be talking to us 3 times a week! Sending e-mails weekly and updating their website more than once every 3 months!!! They throw out issues and HAVE NOT told us anything about those issues!! They’re WASTING our money people!! WE are paying them money to hide but they SERVE US! Our district is falling apart and we NEED people who will continuously fight and communicate with us!!!
# 774,
I have not changed my position on Class Size Reduction. I continue to believe it should be implemented. The issue is which funds are used to pay for it. My position is that CSR funds should be used.
The District receives $1071 for each of the first 20 students in a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grade class less a greatly reduced graduated penalty depending on how many students over 20 each class is. The maximum penalty is 30% for going over 25, with no class size limit except that imposed by Ed Code. They also receive $565 for each Kindergarten student receiving at least half their day’s instruction in a 20:1 or better ratio. Although I do not believe it has been included it in their current budget reports, the District expects to receive $11 million in QEIA funds, to be used for CSR at QEIA schools. During the summer, I presented the District with analyses demonstrating that there was adequate funding for CSR using CSR money.
The District, however, is not using CSR money to pay for CSR. Instead, they took all or most of each site’s categorical funds (EIA, etc.) for this purpose. The reason is that CSR funds are unrestricted and can be used for expenses other than CSR, such as for new positions at the District Office. EIA funds are restricted and must be used for certain populations including English Learners and Educationally Disadvantaged students. It could possibly be argued at many sites that the classes that are being paid for out of EIA funds are entirely composed of eligible students. The Department of Education will have to ultimately determine whether it is permissible to use EIA funds for CSR.
More importantly to me than the possibility that EIA funds may not be used for CSR is the fact that sites have been left with only a small portion of their categorical funds, if any, to serve students in need of additional academic support beyond what they receive in their regular classes. It was not necessary to take away site’s funding when the District receives nearly sufficient, or sufficient, CSR money to pay for CSR.
Another important issue is that the decision was made in the summer without input from the School Site Councils (SSC), even though the use of each site’s categorical funds must be approved by the SSC. The District knew that, if necessary, they would be able to exert sufficient pressure on the SSCs to obtain the approval they wanted. When one School Board Member asked if the SSCs don’t have to approve the use of the funds, he was told by a District Administrator that the SSCs would be “brought on board.” Rather ominous sounding, I think. I’m sure Principals were pressured to produce a certain vote where the SSC balked.
Any of the SSCs could have refused to allow their categorical funds to be used for CSR, in which case the District would have had to use other funds, such as CSR funds, to pay for it. Some SSCs may have feared that the District could have eliminated CSR mid-year if the School Site Council wouldn’t approve using their EIA funds for this purpose, although it seems unlikely given that the teachers were already in place, the upheaval it would cause, and the loss of some of the CSR funding. If there were only one or very few SSCs not approving it, would or could the District have increased class sizes at just those sites? That won’t be an issue now since, I believe, approval was obtained from all sites, some requiring a little more “convincing” than others.
The SSC at my site (with the exception of the Principal of course) stood in opposition to using our EIA money for CSR, taking the position that CSR money should be used instead. A Uniform Complaint was filed. Ultimately, our SSC did approve using the site’s EIA money for CSR, perhaps out of fear of losing CSR at the site or a belief that the District truly could not function without being able to use the CSR money for other purposes. A couple of visits by a District Administrator to our SSC meetings might have had an impact as well.
Patricia, are you running for SAEA President? Just curious. That is an interesting observation, but you know that our district will continue to keep hiring (idiotic) positions that we don’t need. No one stops them. Their newest scam of blowing smoke up people’s a** is “declining enrollment”…let’s lay off teachers & hire MORE idiots at the district office. Is there really going to be that much of a drop in enrollment?????? The office told me that there’s a huge waiting list of kids to enter so sometimes I think the district uses this to justify layoffs.
I would like to know if Patricia is running too. She has my vote. We need a whole new SAEA who’s actively involved. Patricia is as or more involved than Susan. People I think now realize the mistake they made with Susan! You have my vote Patricia if you’re running.
Patricia has my vote.
Patricia also has my vote. Susan has not contacted laid off teachers informing us of what is going on. I find out through other teachers at my old school site.
Patricia has my vote, too. Not knocking Susan, but I think Patricia has always had a better handle on what’s happening, not to mention also being a far superior communicator. Thank you, Patricia, for your continued involvement in what must be a tiring and often thankless endeavor.
Patricia has my support too. The union is too cozy with the district.
To Teacher Shaking Head, Case In Point new position to be approved 14.0: Director of Logistics. I think that Jane has someone in mind for yet another administrative position. I guess that none of her 8 other assistants could do this job.
Ok, as long as you’re not wanting to get rid of CSR. Thanks for that explanation. Not sick of Patricia
Response to #776
I do not understand why your own SSC would vote to approve EIA money to be used for CSR if they did not approve of this action. They will not lose their teaching positions, parents will not be fired from SSC positions, students that sit on the council will not be sent to other schools. Did the SSC members at your site all have their hands twisted behind their backs before a vote was taken? These “alarmist” statements are what truly bothers me about false accusations against the union and district.
I want the truth, not “mudslinging” accusations with no real basis. I know that you will accuse me of being a “union or district” supporter, but I am truly a teacher that wants the truth and the ability to provide the best education for the students at each of our sites. I am tired of all the whining and “wrongdoing”, but I do not think there were any broken arms at your site SSC meeting when the EIA/CSR question came to a vote. If you know that all your SSC members wanted to vote against this, it appears that you have no influence with the SSC peers at your site if voting against the EIA/CSR funding was what they desired.
I have been a member of a high school SSC and at no time was there any “forced” vote issue. We voted what was best for our students and their education at our individual site. At no time was my “arm twisted” to vote a certain way. I find this ridiculous and truly believe that this is not a widespread problem in the district. I feel that you are an individual that wants to keep “stirring the pot” for continuing dissension at your individual site to promote your own agenda. Keep it at your site and allow the other sites to function in a non-obstreperous manner.
We need to all work diligently to get the word out that we need to vote for Patricia if she runs. Last time I think a lot of people were lazy about voting and just were not informed about the decisions they made. We know now from experience that the current SAEA is not working. They are not prepared for anything! Like someone else said “they are to cozy” with SAUSD, but what I think is that they are either to lazy or just not experienced and involved enough to actually make a difference, Instead they take the easy way out and just agree with SAUSD. Instead of communicating with us, they rarely send us emails, not to mention from what I heard from another post on here they’ve pretty much abandoned the last 99 people who are laid off. “Still Laid off” has not heard from them for months, yet they took a years worth of dues from them.
Patricia you NEED to try once more! Please let us know if you’re going to run because I think many of us will back you up and get the word out! The sooner you let us know the sooner we can start spreading the word about and letting those in our schools know. Never give up!
784:
If only the elementary sites were run like the secondary. But they are not. It evolved to where the principal usually runs the council, schmooze’s with the parents making them feel important so that they will vote with the principal, and are the teachers evaluator. All things being equal, all things are not equal. It is unusual for the district to bring their personnel to the meeting, so when they did wouldn’t you say that was undue influence and the teachers capitulated like a house of cards? As Patricia said and you know, that CSR was done in the summer before any SSC met. It was a done deal before the vote. Teachers are not going to subject themselves to the very real retaliation for a vote. Imagine the problems it would cause if even one school rejected the top down decision of the district. Other schools might follow suit and there will be uncontrolled democracy.
As long as the district believes (apparently correctly) that it can use site money as they see fit, it will never be up to the SSC. All the TOSA money was spent with School Site money in the summer without any input from the schools council, as they didn’t meet. Unless this practice stops, teachers will forget that it is the schools money to begin with to be spent for the schools need. Tutoring by teachers for their own students will be a thing of the past.
I have to give Patricia grit for follow through. The dismissal to a final appeal to a PERB case she filed in 2004 was posted on 12/30/09 and can be read at this link in PDF format:
http://www.perb.ca.gov/decisionbank/pdfs/2087E.pdf
How often are SAEA presidents elected? It seems like just a few months ago this thread was just inundated with all sorts of sculdugary from the last election. Now you all are talking about the next one.
#784 fairandlogical,
#786 TheOutsider is correct.
At our site, we struggled for years with the former principal over the SSC. The former principal always “stacked” the council with “his” parents and even demanded that the BRT [his crony] always be there to “interpret” for the parents and that she was a voting member too! It NEVER mattered what the teachers on the council voted, they were always out-voted by his constituency. The District got their way for many years here.
Thankfully, since last year, we have a human being for a principal and he actually cares about what is best for the students. The SSC is far closer to being representative for the students first.
Patricia and others are/were correct. SAUSD is using EIA monies in potentially questionable ways. I hope that for once the District thoroughly researched the legalities of this process. I can understand the District’s desire to be as “creative” as possible with ever-dwindling funds, but I don’t want to see another “phantom classes” scenario besmear SAUSD.
Here’s the proof…today, several teachers at out site were asked by the office manager to sign documents that state that their salary is being paid from EIA designated funds. One of the teachers asked if this process had the approval of the union, but the office manager didn’t know. The teachers were NOT comfortable with this situation and made copies of the documents. At least one teacher isn’t even sure if they want to sign the papers. Is this happening at other sites? Does anyone know if this is legal? What does SAEA have to say about this practice?
A few years ago I attended a few SSC meetings for a middle high school. What a joke! It was very clear the parents asked to run for election were hand selected to suit the agenda of the principal and/or select teachers. And, neither the teachers, parents or students were versed in RROO. Isn’t that convenient. Keeping the majority of SSC voting members in the dark certainly benefits the agenda of certain principals and teachers.
As a taxpayer I was astounded how “my tax dollars” are squandered and I was totally disillusioned to discover teachers are way too political when it comes to SSC.
People will argue that schools should not be run like a business, however I disagree. The unions are mucked up enough, why not give the business model a chance.
And, Susan was a big mistake. I saw her in action at Lathrop. Big mistake. I’m surprised educated folks got duped by that politically corrupt gal.
790 Anonymous certainly quickly and accurately accessed what really goes on in SSC meetings. However, you give too much credit to the election counting process. Just because Susan was pronounced the winner doesn’t mean another candidate didn’t get the most votes. Unless the way votes are counted are changed, perhaps sent directly to an accounting firm or a third party web based system, these incumbents will always win no matter what.
There’s a change in the weather… could it be… why yes it is…. It’s RIFF season again!!!! How will sausd handle it this year?
The Outsider –
My fave school site council story is the one where the teachers asked the council to pay for a conference being held in Hawaii. The twist to this request, is that the same conference was also being held in Southern California. Take about “unethical.” If the majority vote on the council are your fellow teacher friends and/or students it’s a no brainer. Aloha on the taxpayer dollar. Multiple that by how many SAUSD schools? That’s the dollars dedicated to substitute teachers only compounds the amount of malfeasance.
in re: to recent comments from the outsider and anonymous –
What planet are the “outsider” and “anonymous” on? Teacher’s in SA do not like waste and try to do something about it every chance they get Can’t say the same for the district and most administrators, though.. O and A -You obviously don’t work in SAUSD, and I doubt the veracity of your school site council “stories” – fiction?
Willard has been saved..
Thank god all mighty…willard…is saved.
Amen..
This are the words of willards new principal..
I meant….
Preacher….
Dennis “fake” cole.
I got the impression….staff at willard…vacation…came to a crashing end…the hooney moon…was over beforeit started..
Fake equals dennis cole..I got to meet this guy at the D.O several days ago..and completely understand what the staff is saying about this..
He can’t wipe that stupid look off..his face. He comes across like this smart guy, but in reality has no concept. How long was this guy at villa…and who’s boys is he.I know he knows or is someones buddy to have landed a principal stop so soon..because, smart he is not.
#795. Please, please, please PROOFREAD!!! We all make the occasional error in punctuation, etc., due to lack of proofreading, but your comments are difficult to read. Please tell us you ARE NOT A TEACHER!!!
#794
You can’t take the truth.
A few years ago a group of concerned citizens made the effort to attend a variety of school site council meetings and it was an eye opener. Some schools failed to post the oligatory notification, per ssc bylaws, and some even forged offical ssc documents. I’m certain you recall a certain principal (Manuel Esqueda) was relieved of his position for abusing ssc guidelines.
It wouldn’s surprise me if #795 is an SAUSD teacher. I just wonder if #795 is the SAUSD teacher that turned in his neighbor’s cat to the pound. That was a most unfortunate episode in our neighborhood north of 17th Street.
I hate it when this place becomes the rumor mill. For the record, in 23 years of education in SAUSD, I’ve never seen any conference out of state approved for teachers aside from possibly a NEA meeting and the funds came from the union. This excludes administrators, but I have never heard of or seen anyone go to Hawaii on the district’s or SSC funds. Does the person who posted that story have anything to back it up? We were told many years ago that no conference requests at out of state venues would be reimbursed for travel, meals or lodging. They may have paid for conference fees, but that’s it.
Central Falls High School To Fire Every Single Teacher
A Rhode Island high school has fired every single teacher after the teachers’ union refused to go along with the superintendent’s proposed plan for increased workload without much extra pay. The school, Central Falls High School, was one of the worst-performing high schools in the state. — Just like Willard!
Jane Russo and Dennis Cole are preparing to fire every single teacher at Willard and turn it into a fundamental school. Why else would Russo put Cole in over his head? Start converting and praying – that’s your only saving grace!
Pray I tell ya, pray like your job depends on it – because it does!
You betcha the honeymoon is over!
Over his head is the the word!
Denise Cole, has no hint, knowledge or the capacity to remotely begin to understand what it takes to run or make a school successful. He was only at villa for what a year, and now he becomes a principal of a school.
Sounds, smells and looks like Russo
Cronyism all over it. Pray and convert
#798 –
The post did not say the Hawaiian conference was approved. The post merely reported out that a few teachers attempted to get the school site council to approve. And the example was provided to illustrate the school site council shennigans that take place.