Just having caught a few minutes more of the last televised school board meeting (the one that voted a year's extension for both Goodloe-Johnson and McGinley), I am struck by the tension that appeared to surface between Ruth Jordan and Gregg Meyers.Don't you wonder sometimes what goes on in executive sessions? I do.
Jordan seemed unhappy about transfers granted to students from Laing Middle School to Moultrie Middle School, both of which are in Mt. Pleasant. Her take was that these "transfers of convenience" could actually be attempts to avoid students who had transferred into Laing from failing North Charleston schools.
Nahh! Couldn't happen, right District 20? No intra-district transfers are allowed in CCSD based on race, are they?
A clearly uncomfortable and rattled Meyers referenced the board's long-standing policies, allowing reluctantly that maybe they need to be revisited. Ravenel woke up long enough to second the idea of revisiting policy.
Nancy Cook quickly changed the subject. Jordan didn't look all that pleased.
Hmm. Maybe there's some hope here that Jordan will not follow blindly.
Posts
7 comments:
I thought the same thing after viewing that meeting. Wouldn't it be ironic if Ruth Jordan is the one who shows Gregg Meyers' true "colors"? Maybe they're not all your puppets like you thought they were, Gregg.
I think someone picked up on Ruth Jordan saying she didn't want to be part of a system that would allow for the schools to be segregated. What she doesn't seem to have fully caught yet is that CCSD has already segregated our schools (just look at downtown). I'm not sure Ruth is old enough to remember that District 20 wasn't always segregated. Contrary to popular myth, it was CCSD that closed down the integrated system we once had downtown. CCSD encouraged white flight and middle class black withdrawal as well. What I don't understand is why she has equated the proposed charter school for downtown as an effort to further segregate when in fact it is an effort to restore both racial and academic diversity to downtown. She needs to understand that she is part of a system that is preventing that from happening. So in effect, she is part of a system bent on keeping our schools segregated. I hope she is beginning to see that.
Toya, Toya, Toya what were you thinking tonight? I know you are smarter than the way you vote. Don't let political ambition get in the way of you doing the right thing.
Toya says it's about "process". Her vote would indicate otherwise. Her inaction in support of District 20 issues says its about her own political agenda, and that of Hillery Douglas and Dot Scott. Toya looks rather awkward trying to explain her way out of a vote that went along racial lines. Given her background, it has to be about votes, because she really looks stupid supporting the NAACP while abandoning the kids on the peninsula. Hey, she's just a token anyway.
Ruth Jordan is just misinformed. Interviews are required at this level when the elected board doesn't know a candidate. Ruth is partially right in that CCSD has never reached out to hire someone it didn't know without an interview or vetting process being conducted first, at least most of the time.
Gordon Garrett was hired without an interview by way of an insider's coup in 1968, when the previously agreed upon candidate, Thomas Carrier (Dist. 20's super) was "deposed" before he was formally given the job. Ironically, Dr. Carrier had been publicly vetted through a hiring process by Dist. 20 specifically for this purpose and was slated to become the county super during the transition as outlined in the initial Act of Consolidation. Gordon Garrett was the North Charleston super and had not been vetted. He just happened to be a local and a political favorite of the faction that ultimately undermined the original AOC and sent CCSD into the direction we now find ourselves. With the promise to become the county super broken, Dr. Carrier soon resigned as Dist. 20 Super and moved on to greener pastures.
The record may actually show that not every super was interviewed and screened as Ms. Jordan asserts. I would say that Dr. McGinley has certainly been handled in a much more satisfactory, dignified and open manner than say when Dr. Garrett suddenly appeared in place of Dr. Carrier.
Is that you, Rev. Darby???
I sure do get some good laughs as well as really pertinent information from readers. Thanks!
That's the least we can do for you after all you've done for us!
Post a Comment