Anda di halaman 1dari 4

From: Sent: To: Subject:

+ original recipients

Carl Shipley Thursday, December 15, 2011 7:58 PM Jeff Russell; Gary Cohn; Ed Petersen; Carol Andrews; Jessica Olson; Pam Lesesne; 'Kim Guymon'; Mary Ann Elbert; Peg Shipley RE: Tonight's Board Meeting and Comments

Jeff this is a good bit of hot gas but I suspect you know that. Because you didnt consider my points in red in my original message and instead used vague and nearly irrelevant points I can see I wont get anything concrete from you and will abandon hope that the issue will be cleared up. I will however leave you with a few bullet points. Roberts Rules of Order is the meeting protocol the board should be playing by during the meetings. The public are not informed that when they speak they must adhere to the rules. If thats not the case you should make it clear to everyone who speaks. Even if the public speakers were bound by Roberts Rules, I was not out of order (its Roberts Rules, not Roberts Content). You tell me I flatly assert without elaboration that Gary Cohn didnt feel the field was a priority. You are correct. The entire point of my presentation was to flatly present facts without elaboration. Again, you should recall the meeting on Wednesday, June 15 at 5:00 pm in the Cascade Library. Gary Cohn and Robert Polk set it up with interested parents from the Cascade contingent. I dont know why you were there, but for whatever reason Gary felt it important to invite you. He then proceeded to proctor a survey to determine our level of support. Unfortunately, of the 3 or 4 options we were given to choose, none contained the scenario we had requested on numerous occasions. The lack of this option caused a stir with many of the parents and a discussion ensued, eventually leading to the issue of funding. I asked Gary why the field option wasnt one of our choices. He said there wasnt money for it. I asked him very directly, if there was enough money to build both the administration building and the track and field at Cascade, which one would be higher on his priority. After several iterations he finally told me it wasnt his decision and that he could only recommend to the board. I then asked you how you would prioritize them and you said you couldnt answer because you were only one member of the board. Im sure you recall this exchange; if you do not there were several others in the room who can corroborate. Knowing this, now please consider my statement that Gary Cohn didnt feel it was a priority. If he truly felt it was a priority, why did he not submit this to the board? Its worth noting that subsequent to this meeting the board somehow found more money to allocate to the administration building. You also say Im forbidden from questioning his motives. Ill be honest, I dont even understand what youre getting at here. Are you suggesting the superintendent and the board are beyond reproach? Are we not allowed to understand his motives? Is it our place to blindly follow? And finally, as an American citizen I am protected by the First Amendment allowing free speech. You were sworn in to protect this same Constitution. You should keep that fact in mind next time I speak.

Gary, Ed, Jessica, Carol and Pam Please feel free to chime in on this. Id love to hear your take on it. Do I assume all 5 of you are in 100% agreement with everything Jeff presented in his email? Regards,

From: Russell, Jeff [] Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 6:38 PM To: Carl Shipley Cc: Cohn, Gary Subject: RE: Tonight's Board Meeting and Comments Dear Mr. Shipley, Thank you for sharing your concern about the warning I delivered to you following your public comment at the December 13, 2011 regular school board meeting. I did provide you the courtesy of speaking last on the topic as you requested in writing on your public comment form, even though you were the first to sign in. I will now provide you the courtesy of answering your request for an explanation. The Public Comment Guidelines of the Everett Public Schools, which can be accessed through the district website in the General Library Section of the Board Docs program and are also printed on the public comment form, which you completed at the meeting - states: The president may interrupt or terminate an individuals statement if it exceeds the time limit; is personally directed, abusive, obscene or irrelevant; violates the privacy rights of students or adults, or is a description of or a request for changing an imposed student disciplinary action. The board as a whole shall have the final decision in determining the appropriateness of all such rulings. The specific item in your comments that raises concern in my mind is found in sentences number seven and eight of your transcript. There you flatly assert without elaboration: Why didnt the district decide to pay for the new field? Because Gary Cohn didnt feel it was a priority. This above declaration is, or is at least very close to being a personally directed statement and risks violation of the above referenced Public Comments Guidelines. It is permissible to say, I feel It is questionable to say, I think that he feels . It is highly questionable and at risk of violation to assert flatly and without elaboration, that he feels. To assert your presumed assumption about another individuals feelings as fact wades into the waters of being a personally directed comment. The same declaration also steps toward the prohibited line of questioning of anothers motives. Roberts Rules expressly forbid this. It is permissible to quote a statement from an individual; it is not permissible to make assertions about an individuals motives. Because Gary Cohn didnt feel it was a priority is a statement about motive. In the future, to avoid risking violation of personally directed comments and the question of motives, it is best not to make comments about what you presume to be the feelings of others, especially comments without support of substantiating statements. Sincerely, Jeffery R. Russell Everett Public Schools Board of Directors, President

-----Original Message----From: Carl Shipley [] Sent: Tue 12/13/2011 11:29 PM To: Russell, Jeff; Petersen, Edwin; Superintendent; Olson, Jessica; Andrews, Carol; LeSesne, Pam Cc: 'Kim Guymon'; Mary Ann Elbert; Peg; Carl Shipley

Subject: Tonight's Board Meeting and Comments Mr. Russell. Tonight after I presented my comments at the board of directors' meeting you told me I was dangerously close to crossing the line and warned me against further comments I might make at future meetings. I won't request an apology from you because I would question the sincerity of such a gesture. I will say however that to have the President of the Board of Directors' of the school district falsely accuse and berate me in front of my peers is well beyond the pale of respect. What you did was disrespectful to the district, the board, and the office of President. That you demand a higher level of respect for the board than you're willing to grant the tax paying, voting citizen is alarming to me. Your actions were those of a bully. Not only am I completely within my rights to express my opinion, what I said is 100% factual. I have copied the transcript of my 3 minute comments below. Please tell me specifically what I said that is, in your own words, "dangerously close to crossing the line". Comments in red were not spoken; I've added them for clarification in this email only. Sincerely, Carl Shipley *******************************
Why are you asking me to donate? Because the track and field facility at Cascade is 50 years old and it needs an upgrade. Didnt the board already approve funding for it? Only for the track. Per terms of Referendum 1022, authored by Dr. Cohn Why do you need a new field? Because its 50 years old and rendered off-limits much of the year because of its constant wear and irrigation problems. Corroborated by testimony from public comments tonight and in Robert Polks presentation. Why didnt the district decide to pay for the new field? Because Gary Cohn didnt feel it was a priority. Recall the meeting in the Cascade library on June 15 with both you and Dr. Cohn in attendance, I asked Dr. Cohn point blank if he would prioritize the new administration building over the track and field construction at Cascade. He responded it wasnt his decision and that he could only recommend to the board. I then asked you how you would prioritize and you said you couldnt comment because the board only speaks as one voice and you were just one person. Maybe he and the board didnt realize the field needed upgrading? They knew. Ive had private discussions with both Gary Cohn and Ed Petersen. Ive presented the case at 4 different board meetings and Ive sent a number of emails to both the board and superintendent. I have the transcripts and emails if youd like to read them. The emails to which I refer were sent to the entire board and Dr. Cohn. You were present during all of my addresses to the board. Let me know if youd like me to attach the emails and transcripts to this message. What has been their stance on the field? The district will not pay for it but said if the BCP could raise the money from the public by this time next year theyd accept our donation and build the field. This is well documented How much do you need to raise? $1.5 million. Actually slightly higher, figures provided by district. Whats that big area theyre clearing over by the stadium? Thats the new administration building. Whos paying for that? The district.

How much will that cost? $27 million and counting. Did we vote for that? No. Is the cost capped? No. The board just approved additional funding for it. How much did they approve? Between $800,000 and $3.1 million, depending on who you talk to. Figures represent Dr. Cohns ($800,000) amount from last weeks meeting and the figures the Everett Herald quoted a few weeks back They just approved additional funding for their administration building but refuse to pay for a field for the students? Yes. So what happens if you raise the money by December 2012? Construction on the field happens summer 2013. Information directly from the district What happens if you dont raise the money by December 2012? Cascade does not get a field upgrade. Are there any other options? There have been vague suggestions that verbiage might be added to the next bond to pay for the field. Theres another bond measure coming out? When does that hit? Yes. Both bonds and levies will be on the ballot in the next few years. So theyre spending over $27 million on a new administration building used by a few hundred administrators that was not approved by the voters, but they refuse to replace a 50 year old field used by tens of thousands of students, community members and organizations year round. And after all that theyre going to ask us to approve both a bond and levy? How is this untrue? Yes. Seems like the Everett School Districts been in the news lately for all the wrong reasons. This seems like itd be a great opportunity to help their image. Conversations like this have started occurring in soccer, football and lacrosse clubs. And in running clubs and book clubs. In parent groups and church groups. On Facebook, blogs, guest commentaries and letters in newspaper print. This is our story. You have the power to change it. We who are tasked with raising $1.5 million from the public are the same people who volunteer to make phone calls to support bond and levy votes. We are parents, students, community leaders, neighbors. You may save $1.5 million now, but what will it cost the district in the long-term? The question you should ask yourselves is will you have any political capital left to burn come bond and levy voting time?