Saturday, October 23, 2010

SFGate: San Francisco school board recommendations

This from SFGate:
San Franciscans will be choosing from a strong field of candidates to fill three spots on the Board of Education.

One incumbent, Hydra Mendoza, clearly deserves another term. As education adviser to Mayor Gavin Newsom, Mendoza has helped bridge the working relationship between the school district and City Hall.
Read the full story

24 comments:

  1. "Kim-Shree Maufas, does not merit re-election. Her use of district credit cards for personal use showed a disturbing lack of regard for accountability with public funds."

    Wow. Just wow.

    SF Examiner also had an article about the school board election, focusing on the school assignment issue:
    http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/Campus-assignments-hot-topic-of-election-104997959.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. Correct link is here. For those who can't be bothered to click through the answer is: Mendoza, Brodkin and Hoehn (who?).

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kim-Shree Maufas cancelled participating in the PTA/PPS/CAA Board of Ed candidate forum last night.

    She cancelled the AFTERNOON OF THE EVENT saying, apparently, she is very busy on the campaign trail (like going to a candidate forum that had been scheduled for weeks isn't campaigning?)

    She was spotted in the Castro campaigning instead of talking to PTA/PPS/Chinese for Affirmative Action parents.

    WTF?

    Pullleeezzz - get this woman off the BOE. Brodkin, Murase, Khalif, Hoehn would all be 1000% better replacements for her.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I got this flier from "Pissed Off Voters of SF" or some such thing. The minute I saw they'd endorsed Maufas I tossed the flier and disregarded their other endorsements.

    ReplyDelete
  5. You'd think they'd be "pissed off" that Maufas uses SFUSD credit cards for personal use and that her daughter steals laptops from SFUSD during her mother's BOE meetings.

    I certainly pissed off about THAT!

    ReplyDelete
  6. If you're not pissed off enough about that, you might want to get pissed off about her extensive use of the school board car and SFUSD-provided taxi vouchers for personal use and campaign use. And the Ethics Commission will probably wind up getting pissed off about the fact that she's spending her campaign donations on her living expenses.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm not that enthusiastic about paying for Commissioner Mendoza's daughters' babysitting, either. Her oldest daughter wasn't that young when she was seated on the Board, and the Board used to offer child care to citizens who attended Board meetings. Did Mendoza take advantage of that service? If not, why not? Unless there is some outstanding reason why her daughters could not look after themselves, I don't think this expense can be justified. $1,500 would go a long way at a school site.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Re Mendoza's babysitting: I can see the advantage of having kids at home with a sitter rather than being hauled out to on-site child care, which disrupts homework, bedtimes, meals etc. -- especially since this is for many meetings for which Mendoza is essentially unpaid.

    But the district needs a regular policy on it, and I would question providing that benefit now. Today's Chronicle story says she was still getting it last year, when the kids would have been in 9th and 6th grades. Will a 9th-grader even ACCEPT a sitter in the house? Unless the kids have special needs or are real hell-raisers, this seems like a needless expense.

    And what's with Kim-Shriek's taxi and rental car expenses? Anyone care to bet that she spent the entire time in Orlando at Disney World?

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/25/MN0P1FUVKS.DTL&tsp=1

    ReplyDelete
  9. I work for the UC system. If I ever submitted receipts like that I'd be hauled into the Dean's office and disciplined, pronto, or possibly even fired. Ours are capped by a per diem and a strict limit on what counts as a work-related expense (babysitters, no, commuting and parking, no, unless at a conference and then it's part of the per diem). We take an ethics course every two years to remind us. And no company cars, either. We're constantly reminded that it's taxpayer funds we spend, even though only about 15% of it really is.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Do you know how late some of those board meetings can run? Mendoza is a single mom, isn't she? At least she's being responsible by finding childcare for her kids when she could possibly get home at midnight or later! I wouldn't lump that expense in the same pile as Maufas' credit card uses.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @11:38:

    Then what about parents who attend Board meetings? Childcare is no longer offered; many families must resort to bringing their children, many of whom are younger than Commissioner Mendoza's.

    I have a problem with Board members spending significant public sums on services not available to district families.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Then what about parents who attend Board meetings?"

    You don't *have* to attend the meetings, unlike Mendoza.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "SF Examiner also had an article about the school board election, focusing on the school assignment issue:"

    Is it really a hot topic?

    The most contentious issue, to me, is whether or not Middle School feeder patterns are implemented, and that's not really been debated even here. But for elementary and HS level, it's a done deal.

    The only quotes they got on student assignment are from Starchild (who doesn't frickin' understand the issue at all) and from Mendoza. Even Khalif didn't really talk about assignment.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Mendoza Brodkin and Hoehen for me. I can overlook the childcare expenses, but I cannot overlook a trip to China and a pair of black crocs. Sorry Mufas. wait, no I am not.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Tonight is the final school board candidate forum, starting at 6:30 p.m. at Lincoln High School (20th Ave. at Quintara). KALW (91.7 FM) will be recording the forum and expects to broadcast it tomorrow night starting at 7:30 p.m. (assuming the sound quality is good).

    Eight of the 11 candidates on the ballot will be present (Bill Barnes, Tom Chan and Kim-Shree Maufas have declined).

    ReplyDelete
  16. Vote against Maufas by voting for
    1. Hoehn
    2. Murase
    3. Brodkin or Mendoza (choose one only)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hoehn? She'd be awful.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Brodkin, Mendoza, Murase!!!!! Groups who have endorsed this slate are:

    Raoul Wallenberg Jewish Democratic Club;
    Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club;
    Plan C;
    Noe Valley Democratic Club;
    District 11 Democratic Club;
    Chinese American Democratic Club; and the San Francisco Parent PAC.

    Vote Brodkin, Mendoza, Murase on November 2!!

    ReplyDelete
  19. You don't want Maufas to come in Number 3, do you? To prevent that, give support to Murase and Hoehn. If the polling results from Reset San Francisco hold up, the votes will be very close for the third and final seat. Murase and Hoehn need your vote more than Mendoza and Brodkin do to get onto the Board and edge out Maufas.

    This is the strategy for an "Anybody but Maufas" slate of
    1. Hoehn
    2. Murase, and
    3. flip a coin for Mendoza or Brodkin.

    The goal is to defeat Maufas. We have to vote with that strategy in mind.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Is there anyone on this blog still undecided? KALW has broadcast last night's candidate forum (skipped by Kim Shree Maufas, Omar Khalif and a few other candidates):

    http://a4.g.akamai.net/7/4/27043/v0001/kalw.download.akamai.com/27043/KALW/BOE%20FORUM%20FINAL.mp3

    ReplyDelete
  21. fed up with politicsOctober 29, 2010 at 1:53 PM

    Did any of the candidates besides Starchild actually express an opinion on something controversial such as the new MS SAS, or did they all just blather on about noncontroversial things like raising achievement for all, keeping families in SF, etc etc? I can understand that Brodkin, Maufas and Mendoza are doing well based on name-recognition and would therefore be reluctant to state any positions that could turn off voters, but what about the rest of the candidates?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Starchild is a loon who "doesn't believe" in global warming.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I listened to only part of the KALW broadcast. A question from the audience was about the immersion programs not working under the feeder patterns. On tis blog, Starchild has stated that he opposes the new student assignment system, including the middle school feeder patterns. But at the candidates night, he talked about schools offering what students want and students getting their first choice of schools. Starchild did not succintly say that he would oppose middle school feeder patterns.

    The question was given to Emily Murase. (Only two or so candidates would answer each question from the audience, not all the cndidates present.) Murase said that she supported the delay in the implementation of the feeder patterns.

    I did not listen to the entire broadcast.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Natasha Hoehn is out campaigning for Jane Kim today. Now I know not to vote for Natasha Hoehn. Jane Kim spent kids' money going to a hip hop convention in Las Vegas. Is that the kind of Board of Education Commissioner Natasha Hoehn would be?

    ReplyDelete