Kevin - I watched the Board meeting video (thanks Chis Chiang for this innovation in local gov.) and I did not see this "direction". There was not a clear statement from 3 Trustees on the draft Administrative Regulation Contract issue. Will the leadership of the MVWSD (Bd. President and Superintendent) actually put it on the very next Board Agenda? Put a written draft, showing increased "limits" on contract actions by the administrators?

The Administrative Regulation proposed, several meetings ago, by Dr. Rudolph did not impose any further contracting limits, and in fact, specifically spelled out (and seemly encouraged) the same sort of negotiate, sign, THEN bring to the board on CONSENT AGENDA (no discussion). Poppycock.

Gutierrez's "important step"? See If the next Board meeting has it as Discussion and Action Agenda item! The leadership of President Gutierrez and Superintendent Rudolph have complete control of this.

@Steve Nelson

It would appear that President Gutierrez is indeed moving forward, in a calm, meaningful, respectful and professional manner, toward fixing the loophole that you were unable to do while on the board for four disruptive years. What a breath of fresh air.

You antagonizing comments are just that.

"ratification as an administerial act" I am sorry, but that's not English. It's "administrative" , for God sake.

So will the district offer a summer math program to the students who need to catch up for next year?

ADMINISTERIAL

adjective

of or concerned with administration; administrative:
administerial matters.

Origins: 1840-50
Random House Dictionary: Web Link

@ Board Watcher - maybe you need to go back and watch the Board meeting where Gutierrez voted for the "loophole" in the first place, and I voted against "the loophole". Or, easier, just go read the Minutes of the MVWSD for
Motion of Nov 19, 2015, Resolution No. 1580.11/15 (page 3)

Web Link

There are those of us in the community, including three parents who gave public comment on this to the Board directly, who think the Board majority (Gutierrez, Blakely and Wheeler) is dragging their feet on a needed correction. @ Board Watcher obviously is not one of them.

so be it

@Steven Nelson

Hindsight is 20/20. No one foresaw the stunt that Superintendent Rudolph would pull with TTO (and he was hired while you were on the Board, not Gutierrez) so take some blame for that why don't you.

Board President Gutierrez is rolling up his sleeves and leading the district out of the distractions and mess you helped put the district in. Your track record of embarrassing disruption and attacking any one who got in your way while a board member is well documented in The Voice. You alone cost the district hundreds of thousands of dollars with former superintendent Goldman's severance package. All because you could not control your emotions (all well documented in Board meeting videos). Had you run again for board you would have been soundly defeated.

So be it.

@ Board Watcher
A board president speaks for the board, and has a larger public profile, but he or she should not have any more power than the other trustees. The board president's job is to facilitate the wishes and operations of the collective school board, regardless of his or her personal opinions and/or priorities. This includes often defending the board and district's policies, even when they may be counter to one's personal opinion, and even when the community them places ownership of those decisions on the board president.

I agree that Board President Gutierrez is improving each board meeting. He shows true leadership, without being overbearing on his colleagues on the board. I would still caution him to be wary of past board practice of non-transparent governance (too much reliance of closed meetings and too little interest in easy to access public information).

A board president does have more power than any other single trustee, that is called the power of the Agenda and the solo power of calling a Special Meeting of the Board. These powers may be abused, handled deftly for the good of the schools, or allowed to atrophy. I do not know if Gutierrez, by himself, forced the Special Meeting on TTO. It was certainly within his solo power to do so, and if he did it over the reservations or the objections of the Chief Administrative Officer, so be the blessings of liberty upon him. Chris Chiang has written, in this public forum, that he did not quite realize, as a new Board President, that he had quite That Power.

Hey - I'm a Big Fan of how Pres. Jose can sometimes help a meeting to smoothly arrive at consensus. He is 'a breath of fresh air' indeed! He allows community comment, to the point that he seems NEVER to be restricting comment from other Board members or the public to a ridiculous ONE MINUTE!

Gutierrez's comments - spoken in public during debate - and his public votes, are entirely an expression of his work as an individual Trustee. If he strongly disagrees on what appears to be "a public statement of the Board"? (was that TTO half apology / half justification statement such-a-thing?) I believe, if he objected to the content of the statement (who did write that, Rudolph?) he could let someone else sign off. He affixed his signature, with reference as President, (which he is) but - was that a "statement of the Board of Trustees"? It is not clear to me!

If the Rudolph/Gutierrez statement is "the statement of the Board" - you can see why myself and others do not think 'the obscuration of public contracts problem' is anywhere near being solved! OPACITY is the foe of transparency in governance.