Posted by Observer, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Mar 11, 2010 at 3:37 pm

Well said. Amen. But let's start by getting rid of Ghysels and not the replacing the CFO position when Goldman moves up. Goldman can obviously handle both jobs.

Posted by John the Man, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Mar 11, 2010 at 5:39 pm

Ghysels [Portion removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language] can't leave the district fast enough. Craig, on the other hand, is a fine person, someone people can trust. But no one can do both those jobs, that isn't realistic.

If given enough time, Craig could handle both jobs. But there aren't 40 hours in a day... nor would he want to spend that much time doing both jobs.

Posted by Carol, a resident of the Jackson Park neighborhood, on Mar 11, 2010 at 6:28 pm

Cuts do need to be made at the district office. We appear to be adopting the reasoning of City Hall whereby overpaid senior leaders' roles are trumped up to justify high salaries. Hire entry level people in their positions instead. Start with the CFO and the Asst. Super for Personnel (read Human Resources). That's the strategy the district uses for teachers. They keep hiring entry-level temporary teachers and fire them every year. I say turn the tables and strategy on the administration. Hire entry level administrators and get rid of the dinosaurs. Save the district a lot of money in the process.

Posted by eric, a resident of another community, on Mar 12, 2010 at 9:06 am

I have two quick points:

- I'm disappointed in the Voice for not putting this story in context. Thanks to the parcel tax, MV Whisman is in much better shape than most local districts

- I'd like to challenge the drone of "cut administration" voices to put out some numbers-- if, as suggested, you turn over the direction of a $50 Million annual budget to 'entry level' people, how much money would be saved? What impact would it have? If you cant answer that, then you should do your homework before you post inflammatory comments

Posted by Carl, a resident of the The Crossings neighborhood, on Mar 12, 2010 at 1:33 pm

Oh come now eric. Use your own logic here. How much is it costing us in terms of developing a highly competent teaching staff if every year newly-hired temporary teachers are fired, and then another new round hired the next year solely to keep the budget down in terms of avoiding paying teachers more? The real temporary talent will go to a better district, and not stick around in MV. This all seems like a strategy of the high-paid administrators to cut costs at the least imaginative level. Sounds like an entry-level management perspective is already at work. So man up with some real argumentation.

Posted by eric, a resident of another community, on Mar 12, 2010 at 3:06 pm

I've made plenty of detailed arguements about the district on these boards. I suggest someone else might need to 'man up' and answer my questions.

New teachers arent getting retained because the state is hosing us and every other district. Period.

Posted by ernie, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Mar 13, 2010 at 8:21 am

Teacher uts estimated for school sites=11

Staff cuts estimated for district office=0

Baloney.

Posted by Maurice, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Mar 13, 2010 at 4:25 pm

Admin salaries should not be cut during such times. We need to keep the best and the brightest running the district. Market conditions match what they are currently receiving.

Posted by Karen Green, a resident of the Shoreline West neighborhood, on Mar 13, 2010 at 10:08 pm

I have a video message for our parents, teachers, taxpayers, MVWSD Leadership, and the Community Health Awareness Council.

Web Link

Posted by Observer, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Mar 14, 2010 at 9:49 am

I sympathize with your cause, but good luck getting this district to do anything under Ghysels that doesn't serve Ghysels. It's difficult to understand why board members or school official or CHAC would not want to meet with you as alleged. But remember, it's not about your child as an individual, it's about your child as a corporate product under the Continuous Improvement Management model. Obviously, your son fell off the conveyor belt, so they need to sweep him under the machine, out of sight. Meanwhile, your voice is lost among the din of the machines.