Note: To put this piece in context, it is a response to an article in the Iowa City Press-Citizen: Holly Hines, "School Officials' Emails Raise Free Speech Concerns; First Amendment Experts Say Legal Threats May Amount to Intimidation," Iowa City Press-Citizen, June 24, 2017, p. A1. The story reported and discussed, among other things, that citizens were concerned that they might be sued if they criticized the Iowa City Community School District superintendent. (And see also, Holly Hines, "External Reviewer Sought for School District; Culture Concerning Whistleblowers is Under Investigation," Iowa City Press-Citizen, September 1, 2016, p. A1.)
Without expressing a view regarding the justification for the criticism, I thought a brief statement of the law of defamation might be useful -- as set forth below. Following Holly Hines story, and my explanation of defamation, the Press-Citizen editorial board published the following editorial: "Alter Culture of Fear in School District," Iowa City Press-Citizen, July 1, 2017, p. 7A (the Press-Citizen only publishes an opinion page on Wednesdays and Saturdays.) Here is my brief explanation on June 28th:
Is Superintendent Criticism 'Defamation'?
Nicholas Johnson
Iowa City Press-Citizen, June 28, 2017, p. 7A
There’s a local issue regarding limits on citizens’ criticism of school superintendents. Can the critics be sued for defamation?
I won’t take sides on whether the criticism is warranted. Moreover, social norms may be more relevant than “the law.” In either case, one’s reputation is a thing of value. [Citizen Julie VanDyke speaking to ICCSD School Board members; photo credit: Sandhya Dirks/Iowa Public Radio]
Not all criticism is defamatory. There must be an unambiguous, clearly false, factual statement (not just opinion), that causes measurable harm to one’s reputation among a relevant group (such as potential employers or customers).
The false assertion that a superintendent stole $97,000 from the schools’ playground fund could be defamation. Saying, “I think he’s doing a lousy job” would not be.
Moreover, the Supreme Court has ruled that while citizens need only show falsity, public officials must prove “that the statement was made ... with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.” Why? Because protection of political speech lies at the heart of First Amendment guarantees.
As Justice Brenan wrote in New York Times v. Sullivan, “[we have] a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.”
This is for newspaper readers only, not legal advice. If you’re involved in a defamation case, get a lawyer.
Nicholas Johnson
Iowa City
# # #
April 25, 2010, 8:00 a.m.
2:30 p.m. update: Murley responds (see bottom of this entry)
April 26, 9:30 update: Meeks responds (see bottom of this entry)
[This is the eighth in what is, as of this morning, an eight-part series on the Iowa City schools search for a new superintendent: "School Boundaries: There Are Better Ways," April 16, 2010 (with links to 23 prior, related blog entries and other writing); "How to Pick a School Superintendent; And My Questions for Candidates," April 17, 2010; "Bringing Home the Bacon and Bezek," April 20, 2010, "ICCSD's Triple Play: From Bezek to Murley to Meeks; Bezek Can Talk the Talk -- On Four Hours' Sleep," April 21, 2010; "Hurlyburly Over Murley," April 22, 2010; "IC Board Peeks at Meeks; Brad Meeks Rounds Out Three Finalists," April 23, 2010; and "Finalists Responses? Decision Sunday? Finalists Offered Last Word," April 24, 2010.]
Constituent Relations Important -- But No Deal Breaker
(brought to you by FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com*)
Yesterday I reported that I'd emailed an offer last Friday to each of the three finalists for the ICCSD superintendent position. It was an offer to reproduce in this blog, without editing or responsive comment from me, any last minute message they'd like to pass on to the Iowa City community. I indicated I'd report back to you here what happened next. "Finalists Responses? Decision Sunday? Finalists Offered Last Word," April 24, 2010.
What happened was that Mark Bezek acknowledged receipt of the email and provided some comments, and that Steve Murley and Brad Meeks failed to acknowledge the email in any way.
(Bezek's prompt reply said that he "really enjoyed my interview session in Iowa City... I came away very impressed with the community, school system and the administrative team, all were very personable and helpful throughout my day...... [. . .] .... Regardless of what the outcome is, I feel I gave it my best shot even with limited sleep and I feel that my interview was reflective of the type of person/leader I am.... What you see is what you get with me [. . .]." (Bracketed ellipses are mine; others are his.))
So one of those things you see, and get, from Bezek is a reply to your email, in an age in which much of a superintendent's constituent relations are going to take place in that medium.
Do I think the results of this little experiment should weigh heavily in the Board's decision of whom to pick? Of course not. But do I think it should at least be one of dozens of the variables in what I've characterized as a "back and forth discussion and fruitless efforts to resolve a classic, impenetrable, multiple-variable-comparative analysis"? Absolutely. ("IC Board Peeks at Meeks," April 23, 2010, last sentence.)
Look, I know as well as anyone the difficulty of staying on top of incoming email. I maintain a number of email addresses, each of which I monitor more than once a day. At the present time there is a substantial backlog, even after the junk mail and list-serv distributions have been stripped out, that involves the organizations, persons and projects with which I have some relationship or responsibility and for which maintain a folder of ongoing email exchanges -- plus a variety of requests from people, formerly unknown, to whom responses are also provided. My goal is to respond to every email within 24 hours. I am not, now, meeting my goal. During a couple weeks of editing student papers, and holding conferences, on top of other obligations, starting early and working into the evenings, my daily triage of responsibilities resulted in the email backlog I am now trying to dig out from under.
So I can understand and sympathize with anyone undergoing superintendent interviews (often multiple and near-simultaneously) in various communities and their triage decisions about email. There are, in short, many reasons why Murley and Meeks might have not responded other than a disrespect and dismissal of constituent email. That's why the failure to respond should not be accorded significant weight.
But the experience is an illustrative lead-in to a discussion of a superintendent's -- and school board member's, for that matter -- constituent relations by email.
So where do my attitudes and practices regarding personal email come from?
The FCC is an "independent regulatory commission," sometimes referred to as "an arm of Congress." A commissioner has no direct responsibility to the President. As Maritime Administrator, however (my first presidential appointment from President Johnson), and "presidential adviser" (White House Conference on Libraries and Information Services; President Carter), the service was part of the Executive Branch and "at the pleasure of the President."
One of the responsibilities of the Maritime Administrator, as it turned out, was to comply with President Johnson's policy on citizens' mail. (This was the pre-Internet age of postal mail.) Any letter addressed to the President, that involved issues within the Maritime Administrator's areas of responsibility, was (a) to be answered, (b) signed by a presidential appointee, and (c) mailed within 24 hours of receipt. The same policy was applied to all presidential appointees.
Senator John Pastore, of Rhode Island, was Chair of the Senate Communications Sub-Committee. Because he had formerly been governor of Rhode Island, I asked him during an informal conversation how he managed his flow of correspondence when governor. His policy was to clean his desk every evening before leaving for home.
In my later years at the University of Iowa I was impressed with President David Skorton (for a variety of reasons; he's now president of Cornell University) and his equivalent approach to email -- promptly answering seemingly every one he received. Another classy educational administrator the Regents ran off, Mike Hogan (now president of University of Connecticut), seems to do the same (as well as maintaining his own personal blog). I've noticed that other successful CEOs and institutional leaders seem to be able to do so as well.
Needless to say, having started my federal government service at Maritime at the tender and impressionable age of 29, I tried to emulate the practices of my elders.
As a school board member, I tried to do the same thing while noting, "As a school board member you may not get any pay, but at least you get a lot of grief." You also get a lot of email. No one holds a gun to your head and forces you to run for school board. Having chosen to do so and having been elected, however, the position imposes some responsibilities. The effort to learn about the ICCSD, Iowa education law, innovations in K-12 education globally and in the U.S., write a column about K-12 issues for the local paper every two weeks for three years, and time spent preparing for and attending Board meetings -- and answering email -- often added a not-insignificant number of hours to my work week.
When I commented to a superintendent (not Lane Plugge) about the email load and asked for advice, it produced what I found to be a startling response: "Just ignore it. Don't answer. If you answer their emails you'll just get more." Needless to say, I found the counsel neither responsible nor persuasive. But apparently some of the other board members followed the advice.
There have been a number of times, still to this day, when an Iowa City resident will describe some occasion and issue, and say with appreciation, "You know, I emailed every Board member and the Superintendent, and you were the only one who ever answered." That has always been reward enough for the hours and effort.
For a superintendent, or school board member, to simply ignore constituents' email is (in my opinion) the modern-day, electronic equivalent of holding a public meeting for constituent input on some issue while board members sit hear-no-evil-see-no-evil-speak-no-evil silent, with no response, as if to say, "Our decision has been made, don't try to confuse us with the facts."
I made the offer to the finalists of space in the blog sincerely. (1) It is consistent with the FCC's former "Fairness Doctrine" to give someone who has been the subject of media reporting and commentary (with today's definition of "media" including blogs such as this) an opportunity to respond to what has been said. (2) It could have been useful for the ICCSD Board and community members to have the benefit of a final word from each finalist.
But I was also engaged in a bit of an experiment. "If you build it will they come?"; if they are emailed, do they respond?
The answer, it turns out (at least on this occasion, and within this timeframe), is that Mark Bezek responds, does so promptly, and with a friendly spirit; and that Steve Murley and Brad Meeks do not even acknowledge receipt of the email.
Because most everything of what the community knows of these three gentlemen is based on what they (and others) say rather than what they do, perhaps this one example of what they do will be useful.
But to emphasize again: there can be many reasons for the failure to respond, and in no event should the experiment be given more than minimal, marginal consideration in comparing the qualities of the three.
Finally, of course the invitation still stands -- both this week and throughout the years of service of whomever is ultimately chosen by the Board: anytime they want to communicate to this blog's readership directly they can do so with whatever they want to say (including scathing criticism of myself).
As emailed Friday, I wish each of them good luck in their pursuit, have not designated any to be a personal favorite, and look forward to welcoming to Iowa City and the school district whomever the Board ultimately selects this evening.
[P.S. As an interesting sidebar on the saga of superintendent selection for the ICCSD, and the seeming inability of the District's Board members and their search firm to find any possible candidates anywhere throughout the entire state of Iowa (and its 350-plus school districts), our neighbor to the west, the Clear Creek-Amana School District is now considering four finalists for its superintendent position. How many Iowans could it find? Four. Four out of four. All of them (at least one of whom is from the sizable city of Waterloo). Amazing! How on earth could they have done that? Maybe we should ask them next time. Or perhaps we might just check the Iowa Department of Education's list of 361 superintendents with their names and phone numbers and start calling around. "CCA Announces Superintendent Candidates," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 23, 2010; Editorial, "Our Quick Take on Last Week's News Stories; Superintendent Candidates -- CCA," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 25, 2010.]
2:30 Update: Murley Responds
Upon my return home from a noontime event today I found an email from Steve Murley, timestamped 11:34 a.m.
The most significant excerpt from that email, which provides as much or more of his useful and reassuring insight into our Board members as our additional insight into him (which it also does):
One comment that you made in your blog post from April 17 deserves to be revisited. You stated that, "Indeed, one should be extremely suspicious of anyone who would be willing to be considered for the job of working with such a school board." Your comment was made in reference to concerns that you enumerated about the lack of a clear governance system, delineation of measurable goals, discussion of educational innovations, and absence of metrics for results measurement related to boundary changes. I am in full agreement with you that these are indeed important issues for the Board to tackle. However, the absence of these does not indicate to me that the Board has chosen to ignore them or that the Board thinks they are unworthy of attention. In fact, I would argue that from my limited interaction with the Board, just the opposite is true. During my first interaction with the Board concerns about board governance were raised and, to a Board member, all agreed that the issue needed to be addressed to further solidify the work in front of them. The presence of measurable goals is one that we discussed at length and that the Board seems to clearly understand are needed to assess progress over time. The issue of concern about educational innovation was also raised frequently by Board members, most notably, when I asked them to provide for me their thoughts about where they wanted to see the District in 5, 10, or 15 years during the last public interview. Finally, although the boundary discussion has been underway for the past eight months, I felt that all of the Board members were clearly concerned about the students in each of the schools and were sincerely working to find the best outcome. In working with many different Board members over the past 11 years in Wausau I would argue that dedicated, committed Board members who recognize the issues in front of the District and are willing to tackle all problems, big or small, hard or easy, are what best serve the students and residents of a community. That is why I chose to return to the Iowa City School District as a finalist and why I hope to have the opportunity to serve the students of the ICCSD.
As promised in "Finalists Responses? Decision Sunday? Finalists Offered Last Word," April 24, 2010, I will leave his comment to stand on its own, which it is quite capable of doing, rather than responding to it.
April 26, 9:30 a.m. Update: Meeks Responds
And as of Monday morning, here is Brad Meeks response in its entirety:
It was good meeting you last week. I appreciate you taking the time to study the process, perspectives of the candidates and a willingness to discuss the issues. Being a former school board member, I’m sure you can readily understand that selecting a superintendent is one of the most important responsibilities of the school board and having the citizens involved in the process is important. It was an enjoyable day touring the community and meeting the people of the district.
I wish the board and community well as the decision is made on the selection of a new superintendent. Iowa City has a great school system and community.
_______________
* Why do I put this blog ID at the top of the entry, when you know full well what blog you're reading? Because there are a number of Internet sites that, for whatever reason, simply take the blog entries of others and reproduce them as their own without crediting the source. I don't mind the flattering attention, but would appreciate acknowledgment as the source -- even if I have to embed it myself.
-- Nicholas Johnson
# # #
April 22, 2010, 8:00 a.m.
[This is essentially the fifth in what is, as of this morning, a five-part series on the Iowa City schools search for a new superintendent: "School Boundaries: There Are Better Ways," April 16, 2010 (with links to 23 prior, related blog entries and other writing); "How to Pick a School Superintendent; And My Questions for Candidates," April 17, 2010; "Bringing Home the Bacon and Bezek," April 20, 2010, and "ICCSD's Triple Play: From Bezek to Murley to Meeks; Bezek Can Talk the Talk -- On Four Hours' Sleep," April 21, 2010.]
Stevie, We Hardly Knew Ye
(brought to you by FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com*)
Last evening Steve Murley, the second of the three finalists for ICCSD Superintendent, had his night with the public "meet and greet" and question time with the District's School Board. The consensus of those in attendance seems to have been, while balanced, more favorable than not. (The third and last of the finalists, Brad Meeks, will go through the same routine tonight: 6:15 meet and greet, 7:00 p.m. questions by Board members in open, public session; Central Administrative Offices, Clinton and Harrison Streets.) (Photo credit: Wausau School District.)
Because my Cyberspace Law Seminar met during precisely the same two-hour block last evening, I was unable to attend. (The first law dean to hire me, Bill Prosser, UC Berkeley, used to write the songs for the faculty's winter break musical. The lyrics for one contained the line, "But every now and then, alas, we have to go and teach a class." I've never considered teaching to be an "alas," but I did have a class to attend.) So I must rely on the reports in the papers, and from my wife, for their evaluations of what happened. (Top items: discussion of his conflict with the Wausau teachers; his progressive approach to science education and response to an increasing minority population.)
Thus, because I didn't feel like I had a very rounded view of who this guy is, I thought I'd begin by filling in some of those details. (But, no, the "Stevie, We Hardly Knew Ye" sub-heading, above, while an allusion to Kenneth P. O'Donnell and David F. Powers, Johnny We Hardly Knew Ye (Little-Brown, 1972), and the Irish ballad, "Johnny, I Hardly Knew Ye", is not meant to suggest a comparison of Murley to President Kennedy, me to Kenny O'Donnell (a former neighbor), or Murley's life to that of the subject of the Irish ballad. It's just the line that popped to mind this morning as I realized how little I knew about Stephen Murley.)
So here goes.
Basic bio stuff -- plus local comments sample. For the basics, I turn to Rob Daniel's opening introduction from April 17, drawing upon the insights from the Press-Citizen's sister Gannett paper in Wausau, the Wausau Daily Herald, and its education reporter Keith Uhlig.
Rob Daniel, "Murley Feels Prepared for Iowa City Job," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 17, 2010, p. A1.
Murley, 43, is one of three finalists . . ..
In Wausau, Murley, who earns $206,500 annually, oversees 8,500 students, 1,200 employees and a $112 million budget.
After graduating from the University of Michigan, Murley was hired as a programmer and personnel supervisor with the Parks and Recreation Commission in Washtenaw County, Mich., before becoming an athletic department supervisor with the Neenah (Wis.) Joint School District in 1993.
After three years, he became a history and economics teacher and coach at a high school in Wisconsin Rapids, Wis., before becoming a middle school principal in Wausau in 1999. He moved up the ranks in the Wausau School District, becoming its human resources and employee relations director in 2001, a job he held for four years before being named the district's superintendent in January 2005.
Dale Lawson, Wausau School Board president, said the board has been pleased with Murley's performance, especially in adding charter schools to the district in recent years as well as helping start an engineering charter school to open next year.
"He's been a large part of the community in representing the district to different foundations," Lawson said. "The board knows Mr. Murley is a good administrator and would not be surprised he would make (a good administrator in Iowa City)."
However, his role as superintendent has been somewhat controversial since the start, said Keith Uhlig, Wausau Daily Herald education reporter. Just before becoming superintendent, Murley dealt with a case where a coach was arrested and eventually convicted for having sex with a student, Uhlig said. Also shortly after taking over as superintendent, Murley and the school board had to defend a $430,000 retirement package for his predecessor, Charles Shuka, a deal that eventually was cut to $135,000, Uhlig said.
In December, Murley received a vote of no confidence from the Wausau Education Association, the district's teachers' union, after a "rough negotiation" on a new contract, Uhlig said. The school board later deemed Murley "proficient" in working through budget issues, but it stressed in the review that he needed to communicate better with teachers and the public, according to his performance evaluation, Uhlig said.
"He's been tempered by controversy since the beginning," Uhlig said. "(The teachers' anger) went away because they settled the contract."
Murley said he is able to make budget cuts when necessary. Under budget caps established for Wisconsin schools in 1993, he said he has managed to cut $18 million from the Wausau district's budget during his tenure.
Here are some excerpts from Uhlig's take on Murley in the Herald's report of his interviews in Iowa City, Keith Uhlig, "Superintendent Up For Iowa Job," Wausau Daily Herald, April 17, 2010, along with a sampling of the anonymous online comments of Herald readers (who seem equal to those of the Press-Citizen in their capacity for mean-spirited ad hominim, rejoinders in fairness, and sense of humor):
Before taking the reins as superintendent in May 2005, [Superintendent Steve] Murley was the district's director of human resources. He started as superintendent while there was a cloud of controversy swirling around the district regarding a $200,000 retirement bonus awarded to outgoing Superintendent Charles Skurka.
The last year has been just as tumultuous for Murley. In a contentious round of negotiations with the district's teachers union, the Wausau Education Association, teachers issued a letter of no confidence in Murley and asked the School Board to remove him.
The School Board stood by Murley, giving him a ranking of "proficient" in his latest performance evaluation, with average scores of three or higher on a four-point scale in eight categories ranging from leadership and organizational management to curriculum planning and development.
Murley is in the first year of a two-year contract that expires June 30, 2011. His salary for the 2009-10 school year is $152,700, plus $1,770 in longevity pay for 10 years of district service.
Comments:
farquardt
Iowa, go for it! If you want a Superintendent who values top down managment style, promotes his own self-interests and pits teachers against the community through divisive rhetoric, then Steve is your man. Hope you don't let him bamboozle you the way he has our district as HR person and Superintendent. Our loss would be your LOSS!
4/17/2010 10:04:52 AM
wausauman5
So the teachers did not get all they wanted in tough times when everybody else is taking pay cuts or losing their jobs. . . . Thats why the teachers and the union were not happy with Murley. Maybe to balance the budget we need to cut some jobs with the teachers and then the union will not make as much money on dues. Let them find out what it is like being unemployed.
4/17/2010 11:21:29 AM
ihavetocomment
It is never popular to make difficult decisions. Teachers will never be happy unless they get everything and more "in the name of the children" and taxpayers will never be happy...well, because we pay a ridiculous amount of taxes and it still is not enough.
Congrats to Mr. Murley...I wish other superintendants would stand up to the union.
4/17/2010 12:18:54 PM
offaclickwithus
Replying to farquardt [above]: . . .
So, you saying that it should be a bottom to top management style? Were employees tell management what and how to do it? LOL!!
Hope you are not teaching that stuff you said to our kids. I bet Murley told Iowa that he would protect the education budget and help keep property taxes low at the same time.
Heck, we think he should be our next governor
4/17/2010 12:28:22 PM
6Putt
Better deal - send Wausau teachers to Iowa, keep Mr. Murley, and hire new "I want to teach" graduates. Instant budget balancing, fewer malcontents, problem solved.
4/18/2010 12:40:39 AM
Not incidentally, while I'm sure it's easily explained, if our Board ends up choosing Murley they might want to, before agreeing on a salary, inquire as to the apparent disparity between the $206,500 Daniel reports and the $152,700 reported in Wausau's Herald (as reproduced, above).
Murley on Murley -- and the Wausau District
Here is some of Murley's presence on the Wausau District's Web site. (Admittedly, one's own Web site is seldom the best source of candid evaluations of one's pluses and minuses. But neither is it totally irrelevant in forming an impression.)
The greeting on his page:
Welcome to the Wausau School District!
Our schools are inviting and energetic places to learn and work, and WSD students have opportunities that few districts can match. From preschool through graduation, our students have access to some of the best educators, programs, and facilities in Wisconsin. Everything we do focuses on the academic and personal success of each individual child. By taking care of what matters most, we can help students attain the skills they need to succeed in an ever-changing world. The Wausau community provides outstanding support to our schools and, together, we create a wonderful place for all of us to call home. Take a look through our website; better yet, come and visit our schools and see Wausau School District education in action. You’ll be glad you did.
Stephen F. Murley
Superintendent of Schools
Murley also has something similar to what our former provost, now UConn President, Mike Hogan, calls his "Pres Release" -- his personal/institutional blog. Steve Murley's is called "Superintendent E-News."
Here is how it opens, plus the most recent entry (from last Monday):
Greetings and welcome to the Wausau School District Superintendent's blog. Ours is a large District ... large in terms of number of students, number of staff, and number of facilities. It is easy to miss the good things that happen day in and day out throughout our District. This blog is a forum to celebrate these successes. Please join me in sharing the achievements of our District!
Hewitt-Texas Elementary School
Posted on April 19th, 2010 by Steve Murley
Congratulations to Mrs. Davis and her 5th graders at Hewitt-Texas Elementary School. They were chosen as one of the Fall 2009 Poetic Achievement Honor Schools and they received a Poetic Achievement Award. The students had their poems published in the Wisconsin/Minnesota Fall 2009 Celebration of Poets. This award is given to schools that have a large number of entries of which over 50% are accepted for publication. With hundreds of schools entering the contest, only a small percent of schools are honored with this ward. Congratulations to all the students for this outstanding recognition!
Accounts of Murley's Evening
The newspapers' stories include: Rob Daniel, "Discussion key for candidate; Murley talks challenges for today's schools," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 22, 2010, p. A1 ("Asked to cite some of his proudest moments, Murley talked about . . . a science specialist system where eight elementary teachers move among the district's 13 elementaries to teach science in specially designated classrooms. He said it has been well received by the middle school teachers. . . . Murley currently is working on his doctorate at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, planning to earn the degree in December. He said he is focusing on superintendent evaluation, an area he said often receives little attention because school boards, rather than other people in education, review superintendents. . . . Murley also talked about working with . . . a higher number of minorities, particularly Hmong and Hispanic residents and students.").
Gregg Hennigan, "Superintendent Candidate Stresses Communication," The Gazette, April 22, 2010, p. A2 ("Murley said it was only the union’s leadership that cast the no confidence vote. He said the relationship is better now, and one of the outcomes was the creation of a leadership group made up of members of the union, school board and administrative team that meets regularly . . .. Also, the teachers got a 3 percent salary increase for next year.").
Holly Hines, "School Board interviews second finalist for superintendent," The Daily Iowan, April 22, 2010 ("At a time when redistricting has fueled an ongoing and heated debate in Iowa City, Murley said he prefers to bring resources to students in need rather than moving those students to different schools. Tracking the number of students receiving free or reduced lunches is only one of many ways to tackle demographics concerns, he said. It’s also important to look into issues regarding literacy and ways to help students who speak English as a second language. At his interview Wednesday night, board members asked him questions regarding topics such as how he’d respond to parent complaints. Murley said he’d be sure to pinpoint to whom each complaint should be addressed and facilitate a conversation between both parties if necessary. Meanwhile, Dale Lawson, president of the Wausau School Board, said Murley has been instrumental in several district initiatives, such as creating a charter school for at-risk kids.").
And here are Mary Vasey's personal observations and opinions regarding the evening, published online in the Press-Citizen's "On the Record." Mary, my wife, was able to attend Murley's session (as well as Mark Bezek's on Tuesday, which I also attended and wrote up as "ICCSD's Triple Play: From Bezek to Murley to Meeks; Bezek Can Talk the Talk -- On Four Hours' Sleep," April 21, 2010). (Mary is a lifelong teacher with a special expertise and experience with alternative education, was one of the first hired for the national faculty of the Coalition of Essential Schools, spent much of her career with the Presidential Award-winning Metro High School in Cedar Rapids, and was on the committee that helped design Iowa City's Tate High School, where she volunteers.)
Steve Murley jumped right in with an explanation of his side of the no confidence vote by the teachers’ association. He implied that the difficulty was with the leadership not the teachers as a whole. Although he didn’t concede that the leadership of the teachers’ association had a point, he did say he learned something from the situation. I gather he decided that the best approach would be to keep in contact outside of negotiations with the three associations represented in the district. He talked about addressing the small issues as they came up. The example he gave was when some of the support staff complained that finding out about transfers in August gave them no time to properly say goodbye in the schools they had served the previous year. The district changed that policy to one where they transferred support staff in the spring of the year.
Communication may be one of Murley’s strong points. He is active in his community and appears to be someone who would use his contacts to listen and to inform. There seems to be a lot of polarization around issues concerning our district and it also appears that there is resistance to change. We really need somebody who can lead, explain and convince.
I do like to see creative solutions like the science program in their elementary schools. I was also impressed with the kindergarten program for four year old children.
He discussed the importance of reviewing policies and either implementing or discarding them. This would directly apply to defining the roles of the board and of the superintendent. It sometimes appears that our Iowa City board sometimes feels paralyzed by a lack of understanding of just what their role is. I don’t think the citizens of Iowa City are sure about that either. Maybe that is something the new superintendent can tackle right away or maybe it is something the board needs to address even sooner.
A highlight of the meeting was at the end when Murley asked the board members to talk about where they would like to see as a goal in five, ten, or fifteen years. Their responses were real and heartfelt. They included a goal of more and better technology in every school and classroom, more effective advocacy in the legislature and on the federal level, and more attention to the demographics in the district. The pressure they have been under was especially clear when Toni Cilek said she would really like to be able to have the time to pursue some more creative ideas and Gayle Klouda said she would really like to get back to working on the ends policies. Sarah Swisher emphasized the importance of urgency now. I realize that, although I may have been critical of them at times, I also know what a difficult job they have and I am thankful they are willing serve.
My conclusions.
Obviously, since I would normally side with faculty and staff over administration in most disputes, I'm troubled by the Wausau teachers' vote of "no confidence." I suspect that simply must have something to do with the fact his contract only runs for two years, and that he's already looking elsewhere. On the other hand, without knowing more, it can't be a deal breaker. (As the comments, above, indicate, some locals want to run him for governor, others are saying, "Don't let the door hit you on your way out.") Cutting $18 million from any school's budget -- the highest percentage of which necessarily goes to salaries -- can't be done without creating at least some pain and strife; just ask President Mason and Provost Loh at the University. He says (a) cuts had to be, and were, made all around, (b) the teachers refused to consider either a wage freeze or a possible increase in teaching load (sound familiar?), (c) relations are much better now, and (d) he takes a new and different approach to staff relations that includes ongoing contacts.
Based on what little I know it seems to me Murley is someone who might fit well for Iowa City. He seems bright, articulate, willing to try new things and innovate with best practices in addressing challenges, is not insensitive to the concerns of taxpayers, and is young and energized.
_______________
* Why do I put this blog ID at the top of the entry, when you know full well what blog you're reading? Because there are a number of Internet sites that, for whatever reason, simply take the blog entries of others and reproduce them as their own without crediting the source. I don't mind the flattering attention, but would appreciate acknowledgment as the source, even if I have to embed it myself.
-- Nicholas Johnson
# # #
