Resident Pushes For ‘Ethics Training’ For DUSD Board

Dear Editor: DUSD leadership in dire need of “Ethics Training”

Disrespectful and Shambolic

Those who attend or tune into the bi-monthly School Board meeting in Dublin can notice a pattern of disrespect in the tone and speech of some of the Trustees. This is highly selective and reserved only for those who disagree with them and question them about their actions. What is appalling is that not only is this lack of respect towards community members (and even towards a fellow Trustee!) who have different views ignored by the leadership but it is also routinely encouraged.

As one of many examples, Mr. Dan Cunningham chose to insult parents in District 4 publicly, at a recent board meeting. He has a record of poor behavior and mentioned the action of the district 4 voters to seek a special election as "shameful". He added scornfully that residents of district 4 should be ashamed of themselves for pursuing a special election. Actually, what is a matter of great shame is his utter disregard and impertinence towards the constituents he supposedly represents.

Another example was when Ms. Miller, the Board President told Trustee Cherrier during a public meeting that he should ask "his friends" to help the Parcel Tax get approved. The insinuations and mention of friends should never have been a part of a public discussion. The attacks by some of these Trustees and their friends on these parents who want nothing more than fair representation is despicable.

There was a speaker who put down the Trustee Cherrier (who recently got re-elected in district 5 just based on his excellent record) and insulted him in public during his speech and the board President allowed this to happen and didn't stand up for one of her teammates.

Poor leadership is now on public display for everyone to see, thanks to the recorded meetings. The disdain shown towards parents and residents who have a different opinion is not new in Dublin.

Representation through Election, not Biased Selection

The reason for the special election was because of the clear bias shown by the majority of the Trustees in not picking a candidate who was and is the choice of the majority of district 4 voters.

They wanted to silence the people and appoint a candidate of their choice rather than giving people the right to elect their representative. A matter of great hypocrisy was when Trustee Cunningham said to the more experienced candidate who was not picked, that he was worried that she had "too much" experience and he wanted to pick someone who had a fresh perspective.

Two years ago, when fed-up Dublin residents asked him to step down from his role and said that they wanted someone with a fresh perspective, he refused to budge from his seat although he had served as a Trustee for a decade. Dublin School Board members have no term limits on their seats!

District 4 voters followed the law respectfully and did what they needed to do without drawing much attention, out of respect for the candidates. When they collected signatures, submitted a petition to ensure a fair election and challenged the provisional appointment, these so called leaders chose to attack these residents whose best interests they repeatedly claim to serve, but in reality they obviously don't!

Lack of leadership -Quoting the now deleted but absolutely true DTA comment on Facebook: "Dublin is craving real leadership at the top".

A good leader is someone who doesn't allow lack of decorum by his/her team but Ms. Miller chose to allow Mr. Cunningham's condesceding comments and did something equally appalling. She expressed her dislike of the candidate as one of the reasons for not picking her and quickly backpedaled her statement when she realized she should have chosen her words more carefully. Rather than being neutral, she made it sound personal which greatly upset many district 4 parents who stayed through the deliberations.

They started to realize then that the whole appointment process was a complete sham and the candidate of their choice never had a chance to get picked (although

1. She was far more experienced,

2. Was more knowledgable on the issues

3. Had demonstrated her commitment over a long period of time and

4. Had a track record of volunteering and being continuously engaged with the community unlike the other candidate, whom most people had never heard of before the appointment process).

It is exactly for reasons like the ones mentioned above that the law favors an election over an appointment. Addressing the Cost QuestionThe district spent half a million dollars recently to switch from At-Large to By-Trustee area elections and the main reason for this switch was to give a voice to those living in these districts. The district recently spent $100,000 dollars on a survey towards a Parcel Tax decision which could have been spent on Teachers or programs.

DUSD spent around $200,000 on a year long salary settlement and administrative leave for an assistant superintendent whom they let go for reasons unknown and this is all accepted as the norm but the 65 to 70 K on a special election poses a problem to them! And they could have definitely avoided this cost if they had acted in a timely way after former Trustee Giannini's resignation and combined it with the November elections.

I believe that it was abuse of power when they sent out a district wide email to all the parents which states that the cost for the special election can be better spent. What they stated is their opinion and NOT a fact and it is their usual way of presenting a small part of the big picture and misleading parents.

Continued wasteful spending by DUSD deserves a whole new letter since it is huge topic. In Conclusion This special election is about letting 5,000 voters in district 4 decide whom they want as their voice, and not let 4 Trustees pick who they “liked” better. This is about the process and Democracy. What do you call leaders who refuse to listen to the other side, are not problem solvers, are utterly disrespectful and biased and exploit their powers to send selective information that makes them look like they care deeply about all residents?

Finally, the fact that begs an ethics investigation is this - Contrary to the law, the Board obtained the confidential Petition with names and addresses of signers and immediately multiple newspapers had copies of this confidential information and started calling people who signed the petition.

This unethical and reprehensible act of distributing sacred voter information was done by a Board “leader” to merely twist the story in favor of their position, without any regard for voter confidentiality. Does anyone still believe that the person who committed this act represents "everyone" in Dublin? There has been no apology offered to date.

Oh! And I have not even started about the 2nd high school yet.

Ramya Ramakrishnan, Dublin resident