Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 6:37 PM
Gary
Bill's at office, which I just left. Will get over there tomorrow and send them to you. Don't know why they're not yet posted, but I've been checking frequently. Thanks for the prompt reply, and I'll respond in full tomorrow.
Thanks,
Gary
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 11:01 AM
Gary
Here are the amendments. Note the legal description of the primary in 1551 is confusing. The law considers the primary to be the date run-off elections are held (I'm guessing because that's when the final decisions are made). Most people think of the primary as the first election three weeks earlier.
For the record, my wish was (and remains) to move the school election to the general, but this was at least a move in the right direction.
More to follow...
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 12:49 PM
My initial answer to his email, posted as My Response to Max Brantley's.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 1:42 PM
Max
I presume you know now that you gave me bad info on the amendments. They were not avlbl to public.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 1:46 PM
Gary
What bad information? I said they've not been online, and I don't know why. I got copies after the committee meeting from Rep. Hyde because I asked for them. That's what I sent to you.
If I could get them, you could too. I just tried harder.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 5:03 PM
Max
A little rock lawyer asked the committee staff for them friday afternoon based on your note that they had been distributed to committee and they said no copy was available for the public. IN other words, still secret.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 5:19 PM
Gary
Secret means their absence is intentional, which it is not. I am not a legislator, so I don't know how they roll over there. All I know is that I saw Representative Hyde pass the amended 1551 out in committee. Questions were raised concerning the confusing date, and the bill was ultimately tabled until Tuesday. 2140 was not brought up. It was a lengthy agenda which was not completed.
As I've now repeated, I asked for and received copies of the amendments from Representative Hyde after the committee meeting. Your LR lawyer could have done the same instead of simply stopping with the first answer.
But since you remain invested in the "secret" description, please report that when asked, the bills' citizen originator provided the "secret" bills to you..all deep throat style.
It'll add to the intrigue.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 5:31 PM
Gary
Also, if you're really opposed to the bills, come to the committee and speak against them on Tuesday.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 6:07 PM
Max
the amendments are not available to the public. that's the bottom line.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 6:08 PM
Max
To be clear, the lawyer went to the staff of the committee and they said the amendment was not available to the public.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 6:12 PM
Max
As for Tuesday, I'll let others fight the election date issue. I think changing LR, a majority black district, from ward to at-large representation is constiutionally flawed and will fail eventually if not in committee Tuesday. You still haven't told me why you favor at-large options for school board representation. and, if you don't, why the law needs changing. the record is that at-large seats, which are more expensive to contest, reflect the wishes of -- guess who?.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 6:20 PM
Gary
Then he should have gone to the sponsor. He obviously didn't want to see it that badly.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 6:20 PM
Max
To me, it's a secret if a member of the public alerted to the existence of something to be voted on at the Capitol can't get a copy of it. I described your legislation in the first note I wrote about it. I've offered your defense. I continue to wait for an explanation for the theory of how at-large board seats are necessary and good for children.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 6:21 PM
Max
ps -- by their very nature, shell bills are stealth legislating until facts are revealed. the closer to unveiling that the details are revealed, the more they deserve to be characterized as stealthy and secretive. the fact that you and favored insiders are aware of the details don't make the facts less shadowy for the 99.999 percent who don't.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 6:22 PM
Max
is the sponsor always on hand at the capitol, with copies of the legislation. hell, man, you didn't have it when i first requested it. that's utter bullshit.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:55 PM
Gary
Speaking of which, you just utterly stepped in it. Check our email exchange. I offered to share the amended bills first, and you accepted late Friday after I was driving home. I immediately replied that they were at the office and I would get them to you the next day. I made a special trip to the office, scanned them and sent them. You're hard to help. How about a "thank you" for making your job easier?
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 6:23 PM
Max
learning about your government is not a damn scavenger hunt. it should be straightforward. you call a paid full-time staffer for information, you get the information. or else people are free to view the situation as I and the lawyer who sought the info see it.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:33 PM
Gary
Sorry, but that's not the issue. 2140 is about the people's right to decide which of the legal, Voting Rights Act compliant, zone choices they will use to govern their zoned school districts. I say the people should decide. You say the incumbent board. We'll see which the Committee chooses on Tuesday.
Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:48 PM
Gary
I consider them procrastinated legislation, for those who have to make a filing deadline, but don't yet have their bill(s) drafted. I'm sure they're also used as you described, but I assure you, not this time.
I'm completely transparent about the genesis. I can break the exact timeline if you wish. How can I be a "favored insider" to myself?
I reached out to your publisher before your post, then immediately to you after. I've offered to publicly debate anyone or any group opposed. I sent you the bills. What more can I do? How about a benefit of the doubt?
Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 5:25 AM
Max
I do thank you. And you helped me. My point was only that the general public then and still remains without similar access to info.
Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 5:26 AM
Max
Your refusal to discuss this speaks volumes
Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 1:46 PM
Gary
Max,
Over the past two days, I've written volumes. In every instance, I've stayed with the issues at hand.
I am working diligently to make real change in a district that is failing thousands of students every day. In all our communications, you have offered no suggestions for improving the lot of these students.
I invited you to testify before the committee. You declined. I have repeatedly challenged you to debate in the public forum of your choosing. You have not accepted. I believe the people should determine how they're represented at the school board. You think incumbent school board members should tell the people how they will be represented. I believe in making it as easy to vote in school elections as it is in any other. You dismiss those who don't vote in school elections as "a bunch of disinterested, not very intelligent people."
40% of the students tested in the Little Rock School District were deemed not proficient in math, literacy and science, which equates to over 10,000 students.
I believe we're in the greatest community emergency of our times. You don't seem to sense the urgency.
I went into this knowing reasonable people will disagree on the means. I can't fathom that anyone would defend the current ends.
I reached out to you, not so much to provide facts to your accusations, but to engage your audience in a thoughtful debate on how to put students first in our district.
The people need honest discussion instead of preaching to respective choirs. That is why I challenge you and the Arkansas Times to join with El Latino, Hola! Arkansas, Stand! News, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette and any other interested media in the district to host a series of community conversations (in all zones in the district) on how to best serve all our students. Not a town hall, but a real debate among those leaders advocating for specific change and those committed to continuation of the current system. I'll be your first volunteer.
Thank you for your consideration, and I'll look forward to working with you on a series of groundbreaking and bridge building events. As always,
My best,
Gary
Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:05 PMGary to Readers
Max
You'll be wholly honest the minute you discuss why you want method of board selection changed. I look forward to your testimony on that point.
How many ways do I have to write it? The people, not the incumbent school board, should decide how the people will be represented. It seems that reading difficulty is not just a problem in the public schools, but also in the editor's office of the Arkansas Times.
Understand, Mr. Brantley is not a reporter or a change agent. His role is to be sensational and stir up his followers. Kind of a local Glen Beck for a tired, anachronistic dogma.
Meanwhile, the Little Rock Public School District, by its own reported benchmark exams, is failing 40% (over 10,000) of its students every year. That is not only devastating to lives, families and futures, but the present and future of Little Rock as a community. Disagree with my suggested means, but get busy with some of your own.
Criticizing the motives of those of us who are attempting triage for what we consider to be the community emergency of our times and defending the performance of the $350 million failing district will only benefit those adults whose jobs and elected offices are at stake.
In the words of Little Rock School Board Member Charles Armstrong at the last board meeting, "Wake up, Little Rock!"
No comments:
Post a Comment