The District Weekly - Latest Comments in NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

reynaakers — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 19:22:11 -0000

Now that meetings are being televised accountability is still hard to come by. Books and supplies win out all the time. The Administrators still have the upper hand(they get paid more for less work). I am sure you both have learned this by experience by now. good luck, I have finally retired(from trying to make the district accoutable) to help the individual students as I felt I was hitting my head against the district wall of concrete. It hurt too much yet if some of my suggestions had been followed the district would have some money in the bank now to help educate students. Why does the district cheat??

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

John_B — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:01:56 -0000

TheShore: When you make comments concerning Councilmember Gabelich such as: “She comes to every City Council meeting unprepared so she has to ask a lot of questions while the other councilpersons get their questions answered in advance. Plus, look at all the accomplishments of Rae. For example, she slowed the construction of the airport parking garage and the terminal improvements so the cost of construction could dramatically increase. Actually that's it. I can't think of anything she did for 8th District residents.” That sounds like bitterness to me, but I suppose I may have misinterpreted the tone.

You’ve asked me for some facts concerning the sorry state of our School District’s finances. I offer the following in response:

Each year our School District produces a State Financial Report. Each year that report includes information on 10 financial Criteria and Standards, 9 items of financial Supplemental Information and 9 Additional Fiscal Indicators (a total of 28 items). In ’06-’07 our District reported “areas of potential concern for fiscal solvency purposes” in 16 of these 28 items. To put it simply, they got 12 questions right on their 28-question State-mandated Fiscal Solvency test. That’s 44% or…if you prefer…an “F”.

In ’07-’08 they got 17 of 28 right, or 62%. Better but still just barely a “D”. For 08’-09’ they backslid; only 13 of 28 right, or 48%…back to “F”.

Our District takes this same Fiscal Solvency test every single fiscal year. In the last three fiscal years it has failed this test twice and only barely passed it once.

Here are some more LBUSD fiscal facts for you, TheShore:

In the FY08-09 budget, LBUSD cut combined employee salary expenditures by 10.5%. Sounds pretty fiscally responsible under the circumstances until we learn that in the very same budget they cut 43% of their expenditures for books and supplies and they did this while actually increasing employee benefits by 0.1%.

LBUSD ended FY07-08 with a $15.3 million budget deficit. This year they project a deficit of $6.4 million. This is an improvement, certainly but still represents, at least to me, severe fiscal mismanagement.

And based upon the previous paragraph, it’s pretty clear what LBUSD’s budgetary priorities are.

I believe that some of our elected and appointed officials at LBUSD are badly mismanaging the tax-based funds we entrust to them to run our District. Mrs. Bosetti’s experiences at Los Cerritos Elementary are just one small example of this. I have now offered you a few others. I can assure you that there are many, many more such examples and that, when taken together, these examples add up to millions and millions of our tax dollars squandered.

Thus, in my opinion, those charged with managing these tax-based funds are, indeed, committing “financial *mis*feasance” or “The improper execution of an act that is otherwise lawful.”

If our personal financial managers performed this consistently badly on our portfolios, we would kick them to the curb. If our banks consistently lost this much of our money we would quickly change banks. If we owned a business and our managers and supervisors repeatedly reported these kinds of losses they would quickly be seeking other employment.

So why do we tolerate…even accept as inevitable…this sort of repeated financial ineptitude from our elected and appointed officials? Elected and appointed officials are our employees. We grant them certain authorities and provide them with budgets to work within. When these officials fail to manage our money responsibly, we (the People) need to remove them from the positions we have granted them and find others who will do better.

This is not rocket science. It’s not complex. We hire these people to do a job and they are failing to do it.

Why, then, are we continuing to employ them?

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

TheShore — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 00:03:59 -0000

Mr. B - What do you think I am bitter about Councilwomen Gabelich? I think she tries to do the best she can, but is in way over her head. Her successfulness with HUSH 2 has not translated into being an effective councilperson.

Also, since you represent yourself as being "facts" oriented, could you provide the facts behind your comment "But, then again, considering the current sorry state of our School District's finances...due, in large part, to financial misfeasance of precisley this sort..."?

It's likely that the school district wastes a great deal of money since it is a government bureaucracy, but "financial malfeasance"? You maket sound like employees are stealing funds.

The problem with California's educational system is that we pay way too much, and receive way too little.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

John_B — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 02:08:26 -0000

Wow, TheShore; sounds like you're more than just a little bitter about Councilmember Gabelich.

Should your bitterness really carry over onto someone like Bosetti though? To the best of my knowledge, she's never even indicated she desired or intended to run for School Board.

And even if Bosetti does run, while there most certainly could be better-qualified candidates who may also run, that's sort of what we have campaigns and elections for.

Do you really feel that Bosetti's unrelenting questioning of our various elected and appointed education officials was "second guess(ing) every recommendation made by the school district's management"? Had Bosetti not questioned this misallocation of our tax dollars, $87,000 would have been squandered. Would you truly have found that to have been acceptable?

Your dismissiveness on this issue simply amazes me. But, then again, considering the current sorry state of our School District's finances...due, in large part, to financial misfeasance of precisley this sort...I can't really say I'm particularly surprised.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

TheShore — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 00:44:58 -0000

I support Diana for School Board as well. I mean after all, I would much prefer someone who will fight for the proper allocation of $80,000 of Title 1 money vs. someone with knowledge about the education system, or a business person with the experience of managing a budget in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually. I want someone on the school board who will second guess every recommendation made by the school district's management.

Wait a minute, isn't that what we have with Rae Gabelich on the City Council? She comes to every City Council meeting unprepared so she has to ask a lot of questions while the other councilpersons get their questions answered in advance. Plus, look at all the accomplishments of Rae. For example, she slowed the construction of the airport parking garage and the terminal improvements so the cost of construction could dramatically increase. Actually that's it. I can't think of anything she did for 8th District residents.

Plus, ever notice how she is on the losing end of most votes, along with Tonia Uranga? Diana could be the same for the School Board. Ask a lot of silly questions because she is unprepared. Take on a couple of issues she personally feels very strongly about, and just vote "No" on the rest of it.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

Hi,my-name-is — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 20:23:21 -0000

Yay for Diana for paying attention and for being willing to take on lazy administrators. And thank you District Weekly for continuing to keep our city clean by exposing incompetence and theft wherever you find it. Hopefully other departments will make sure they aren't taking money from lower income kids to spend on their whims, and half assed covering it up when they know Diana and the District are on the prowl!

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

LB_City_Girl — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:13:46 -0000

BFP-If Bosetti runs she gets my vote. Your little diatribe is not only cliche ridden, it smacks of jealousy and bitterness. Grow up.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

Bosetti For President — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:16:25 -0000

I hope I am not the only person here that can see Mrs. Bosetti posturing for a school board position. First she entrenches herself on the PTA, then School Site Council (attempts to gain inside knowledge of how schools run), and now she creates a "hero's platform" to run for a seat on the Long Beach Unified Board of Education. You people may line up to drink the purple Kool-Aid, but how about we give the career educators the benefit of the doubt as opposed to falling into the gilded lilies of the semi-professional investigative reporter looking to gain a school board seat? (oh yes, Bosetti has written “gotcha” articles for other small publications)
You all called an earlier person a coward for not putting their name on their response. From what I can see, there is only one person here that has continually used her real name. Guess what? Bosetti has to use her name in order to be the "hero" that saved the school district. Welcome to the world of Chess. You have all become pawns in Bosetti's game/campaign for a seat on the school board.
Please open you eyes and see this for what it is. It is not an attempt to help the “poor kids”. It is a campaign for Bosetti to gain a seat on the school board.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

Luukia Smith — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 15:31:53 -0000

I was remiss when I did not respond to Anonymiss. I’m not staying quiet this time. I could not believe the nerve of Anonymiss bringing Diana Bosetti’s son into this. I’m not going to spend my time picking apart those comments, I’ll just spend some time commenting on Anonymiss #2, Conscientious Observer. Anonymiss #2 wants to whine about the fact that her child no longer can look forward to having cinnamon rolls. You are so sarcastic, “Oh my, what a waste of money that one is!” If the government gives a school district money for the Title I program, that money can ONLY be spent on the Title I program. There are guidelines that outline exactly how Title I funds should be allocated. Whether you like it or not, it is inappropriate to use Title I funds to celebrate Honor Roll students, even if this celebration is a good thing.

You also claim, “Now of course, no one, including me, excuses an inappropriate usage of funds,” but this is exactly what your response attempts to do, excuse the inappropriate use of funds. You spend three paragraphs trying to justify why it should be OK to spend Title I funds on an Honor Roll Breakfast. You also try to steer blame away from Lauren Price, the Principal, and throw it on to the District. Lauren Price is the Principal of Los Cerritos Elementary School. She is responsible for every student, staff member, and faculty member who attends or works at that school. A huge responsibility - and probably one of her most important - is managing the school’s budget. Lauren Price better know how she can or cannot spend the monies given to her school, especially if the monies are to be put into categorical funds such as Title I. For me, without even reading exactly how Title I funds should be used, I think I would know not to buy myself new office furniture. For Lauren Price, the Principal, claiming ignorance is no excuse.

Anonymiss and Anonymiss #2, the only thing I see that Diana did was not to accept lame answers to her questions. As a taxpayer, your concern should not be “how” Diana went about this, but “how” in the world did it take two years and Diana Bosetti going all the way to the California Department of Education to force the LBUSD to admit there was a $90,000 inappropriate use of Title I Funds? Please do not try to make me believe Bob Williams’ “good faith” gave back $35,000 - they were caught, that’s why they gave it back.

Diana Bosetti took her elected position on the School Site Council seriously. She did a little research to find out what her and the council’s responsibilities are. She saw that funds were being misallocated, pointed it out, asked some questions and was told by the Principal and the District that the money was being spent properly.

Lauren Price, District Administrators, and the LBUSD School Board were not prepared for a Diana Bosetti to go the distance. Diana was confident that monies were being spent inappropriately and she was indefatigable in her efforts to ensure she acted as a responsible member of the Los Cerritos School Site Council. If, in fact, your school has been tarnished, and if, in fact, this “mess” sticks with Los Cerritos, it is not because of Diana Bosetti. Think about it.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

I_Come_In_Peace — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 01:10:43 -0000

Okay, the lightbulb finally lit up. Sometimes there's a delayed reaction and it takes awhile. Maybe one of the by-products of getting older.....

So, we have no official comment from LBUSD. No official comment from Principal Lauren Price. And now, no official response from Ms. Monica Hunt, who clearly seems to be quite the player in this whole drama. Kind of funny how Mrs. Bosetti is the only one involved in this fray who will go on the record.......

Go ahead, LBUSD, and give us your standard cowdung about, "We don't comment regarding on-going complaints". Blah, blah, blah. Translation: We are cooked but we're going to try to convince people we're not even in the oven....

Principal Price will, I'm sure, hide behind the "LBUSD mandates that I don't comment"....Too bad. It would have been an interesting train-wreck of a speech....

And Ms. Hunt (or 'Anonymiss' or 'Conscientious Obliterator of Truth' or whatever you're calling yourself these days), speak up. We are all ears. Let's hope that you won't want to refrain for fear that Mrs. Bosetti will take you off of her "Happy Arbor Day" card distribution, or something similar.

Well, I'm guessing that the sound of silence will speak volumes...........

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

I_Come_In_Peace — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 00:46:05 -0000

Wow! Who knew?

So here I am, wandering into the District Weekly's website this evening in order to get my regular dose of unfiltered truth -- sorry PT, you don't quite fit that bill -- and lo and behold, I stumble upon some serious shots across the bow between our friends at Los Cerritos. Didn't know the story had legs like that, but I figured it was worth investigating. Now, after reading the latest filibusters, I'd like to share a few comments with you fine people. So, if I may, let me suggest that you fill up that coffee cup and pull up a chair. This may take more than 30 seconds....

First, I'd like to just touch on my initial thoughts. Right off the bat, I notice that there's someone "new" who shows up A MONTH after this donnybrook took place, and he or she has the nerve to call themselves 'Conscientious Observer'? Hmmm, I'm not exactly sure how to put this......Wait, I know....Are you freakin' kidding me??? If you would have consulted someone like me prior to making that pathetic selection, I clearly would have suggested something more appropriate -- probably something along the lines of 'Lackadaisical Observer who Struggles to Formulate Coherent Thoughts to Important Issues in a Semi-Timely Manner'. Oh, shucks, why the sad face? Too verbose for you? Well, I understand. I'm not sure I'd like that moniker either, but then again, I don't think it necessarily applies to me. Andt that whole reference to C.O.being afraid of big, bad Mrs. Bosetti, and doesn't want to get on her bad side? What a crock! That was the dead-giveaway that C.O. was a completely unbelievable cesspool of disinformation. (Anybody have some Lysol?) Given what I've seen and heard from others, this opposition group -- which seem to hold piety and righteousness slightly below cleaning a toilet or picking up Rover's doo-doo -- is so maniacal about performing a proverbial body-slam over Mrs. Bosetti, that I wouldn't be surprised if they draw straws to see who is lucky enough to launch the next toxic salvo at her.....From what I've seen and heard, these pit vipers seem to drool at any opportunity to attack Mrs. Bosetti, so spare me the "I want to stay on her Christmas card list",,,,

Well, nevertheless, while I'm thinking about it, I think it's fair to say that your monumental delay in responding to something that you find so offensive might show some type of cranial shortcoming. And to be honest, I'm thinking that it's one of two possibilities. One, that pudgy little hamster on the proverbial wheel inside of your head was too tired to jog your limited thought process, or two, the LBUSD stooges couldn't curtail their hand-wringing and approve C.O.'s response sooner than a month after the majority of the posts took place. To be honest, I'm still deliberating. Great name, though, C.O. (aka. 'Certifiably Offensive'). I'm guessing it wasn't your first choice, though. I'm thinking that it had to be a bummer when you found out that "R. Williams" wasn't available. Or who knows, maybe losing out on "L.C. PTA PREZ" was your primary source of consternation......

Think about this, folks. We know that C.O. (aka. 'Critical Objector') just dabbled here and there in these meetings, right? You know, just wandered by and "sat in on some meetings last year and the year before". Yeah, sure, you had some free time, and just stopped by to see what's going on, right? Yet you read C,O.'s "I'm so outraged" fiction, and yet they can tell you every detail of every interaction between Mrs. Bosetti and any representative of LBUSD. Heck, C.O. can probably tell you where she parked every time she met with the lions at the 'Hughes Way Den', but that might give away too much information, wouldn't it?

Sorry, people. Let me get to a point here, before that coffee gets cold. You probably know this stuff, but I'm talking about what I've seen at Los Cerrritos. Now, I know I'm no expert, but in my opinion, there's four tenets to a great school: the teachers, the principal, the PTA, and the parents. (I know PTA and parents is a little redundant, but I have a point here, so hang with me.) These four tenets are like the legs on a chair, if you will. Los Cerritos used to be a great school. No one argues with that. Not even psycho C.O. or 'Anonymiss'. (Well, I think if Mrs. Bosetti called the sky blue, these two hens would even argue with that one.....Sorry, another digression...)

What I have seen happen to Los Cerritos is that they were on the receiving end of a new, very green principal, and given her insecurities and inexperience, she surrounded herself with an ever-loyal parent network, albeit small, that would protect her, and run rough-shod over anyone that challenged said principal. Said principal empowers her hench-women to seep into all decision-making bodies within the school -- school site council, PTA, room-parent, you name it. This small group of women has morphed into a malignant tumor that has effectively killed most, if not all, school spirit, profitable fund-raisers, and congenial parental interaction.

Don't believe me? Think, "How could that happen at such a fine neighborhood school?" I suggest you go look at the current School Site Council membership on the Los Cerritos Elementary website. And then right after that, go to the Los Cerritos Elementary PTA website. You people are smart. You can do the math.. You'll find the culprits. Look what the PTA used to do three, four years ago, versus what they do now. Why the long face? Because the kids suffer. The PTA leadership suffers frrom a severe lack of support and will continue to do so, as long as this group of hens insists upon driving this bus......Sorry, I think I'm digressing again.....

Bottom line, folks. Remember the those four tenets that I mentioned before? The chair analogy? Well, in my opinion, as well as many others, Mrs. Price, as one of their legs, is an ineffective leader. (Hey, we have ineffective people in politics, finance, engineering, science, you name it. Every industry has ineffective people who somehow end up employed there. Where is it written that we cannot publicly question and'or challenge a principal one finds incompetent?) An ineffective principal surrounds herself with bitter women who must have something unfulfilling going in their lives to be so mean-spirited. Those earlier mentioned pit-vipers, at the behest of said principal, spread their cancerous reach to other organizations, and what kind of toxic stew do we have to serve????

Highly divided campus. Principal lacks widespread support. Alienated teachers. PTA heavily unsupported (can't wait for their spin). parent alienation (see PTA comment) That's reality folks. I'm I happy about it? No, frankly it sickens me. Was it avoidable? Absolutely. Unfortunately, you put incompentent leadership in any organization, you're asking for trouble.

Okay, so let's assume that the teacher leg is still solid. The principal leg was a termite appetizer. The PTA was a termite main course. The parent support is wobbly at best.......

So, let me ask you folks, how many two-legged chairs would you sit on??

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

John_B — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:03:52 -0000

It's clear that there are a lot of emotions simmering on this issue, not only under the surface, but right out there on the top. The fact that the comments from both “sides” of this issue are still flying almost 2 months since the original article posted is a testament to how strongly some feel about it.

This is at once understandable...being that we're all human...and unfortunate...since, in the end, it is considered and effective actions, rather than emotions, that solve and resolve challenges of this sort.

Like Diana Bosetti or not; she stepped up (with others in her community) and volunteered to serve on a school Site Council, whose very purpose is to provide input to the Principal.

Like Diana Bosetti’s diligence and tenacity or not; she took her role as a responsible citizen and involved parent most seriously and, in doing so, identified what she believed to be a misallocation of Title 1 funds.

Like Diana Bosetti’s sense of responsibility to taxpayers and District parents or not; she refused to accept excuses, platitudes and silence from various District officials and finally resorted to appealing to the State Department of Education for resolution.

Like Diana Bosetti’s refusal to be put off or not; the fact is that the State DoE agreed with her and required a reimbursement of some $90,000 in misallocated Site Council funds.

Like Diana Bosetti’s methods or not; those methods resulted in the identification, investigation and eventual mitigation of financial misfeasance on the part of some LBUSD Officials to the tune of $90,000.

$90,000 of our tax dollars that can now be allocated for the purpose the taxpayers intended.

Like Diana Bosetti or not; you must admire what she accomplished on our behalf.

I most certainly do.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

I_Come_In_Peace — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 03:53:11 -0000

Wow! Who knew?

So here I am, wandering into the District Weekly's website this evening in order to get my regular dose of unfiltered truth -- sorry PT, you don't quite fit that bill -- and lo and behold, I stumble upon some serious shots across the bow between our friends at Los Cerritos. Didn't know the story had legs like that, but I figured it was worth investigating. Now, after reading the latest filibusters, I'd like to share a few comments with you fine people. So, if I may, let me suggest that you fill up that coffee cup and pull up a chair. This may take more than 30 seconds....

First, I'd like to just touch on my initial thoughts. Right off the bat, I notice that there's someone "new" who shows up A MONTH after this donnybrook took place, and he or she has the nerve to call themselves 'Conscientious Observer'? Hmmm, I'm not exactly sure how to put this......Wait, I know....Are you freakin' kidding me??? If you would have consulted someone like me prior to making that pathetic selection, I clearly would have suggested something more appropriate -- probably something along the lines of 'Lackadaisical Observer who Struggles to Formulate Coherent Thoughts to Important Issues in a Semi-Timely Manner'. Oh, shucks, why the sad face? Too verbose for you? Well, I understand. I'm not sure I'd like that moniker either, but then again, I don't think it necessarily applies to me. Andt that whole reference to C.O.being afraid of big, bad Mrs. Bosetti, and doesn't want to get on her bad side? What a crock! That was the dead-giveaway that C.O. was a completely unbelievable cesspool of disinformation. (Anybody have some Lysol?) Given what I've seen and heard from others, this opposition group -- which seem to hold piety and righteousness slightly below cleaning a toilet or picking up Rover's doo-doo -- is so maniacal about performing a proverbial body-slam over Mrs. Bosetti, that I wouldn't be surprised if they draw straws to see who is lucky enough to launch the next toxic salvo at her.....From what I've seen and heard, these pit vipers seem to drool at any opportunity to attack Mrs. Bosetti, so spare me the "I want to stay on her Christmas card list",,,,

Well, nevertheless, while I'm thinking about it, I think it's fair to say that your monumental delay in responding to something that you find so offensive might show some type of cranial shortcoming. And to be honest, I'm thinking that it's one of two possibilities. One, that pudgy little hamster on the proverbial wheel inside of your head was too tired to jog your limited thought process, or two, the LBUSD stooges couldn't curtail their hand-wringing and approve C.O.'s response sooner than a month after the majority of the posts took place. To be honest, I'm still deliberating. Great name, though, C.O. (aka. 'Certifiably Offensive'). I'm guessing it wasn't your first choice, though. I'm thinking that it had to be a bummer when you found out that "R. Williams" wasn't available. Or who knows, maybe losing out on "L.C. PTA PREZ" was your primary source of consternation......

Think about this, folks. We know that C.O. (aka. 'Critical Objector') just dabbled here and there in these meetings, right? You know, just wandered by and "sat in on some meetings last year and the year before". Yeah, sure, you had some free time, and just stopped by to see what's going on, right? Yet you read C,O.'s "I'm so outraged" fiction, and yet they can tell you every detail of every interaction between Mrs. Bosetti and any representative of LBUSD. Heck, C.O. can probably tell you where she parked every time she met with the lions at the 'Hughes Way Den', but that might give away too much information, wouldn't it?

Sorry, people. Let me get to a point here, before that coffee gets cold. You probably know this stuff, but I'm talking about what I've seen at Los Cerrritos. Now, I know I'm no expert, but in my opinion, there's four tenets to a great school: the teachers, the principal, the PTA, and the parents. (I know PTA and parents is a little redundant, but I have a point here, so hang with me.) These four tenets are like the legs on a chair, if you will. Los Cerritos used to be a great school. No one argues with that. Not even psycho C.O. or 'Anonymiss'. (Well, I think if Mrs. Bosetti called the sky blue, these two hens would even argue with that one.....Sorry, another digression...)

What I have seen happen to Los Cerritos is that they were on the receiving end of a new, very green principal, and given her insecurities and inexperience, she surrounded herself with an ever-loyal parent network, albeit small, that would protect her, and run rough-shod over anyone that challenged said principal. Said principal empowers her hench-women to seep into all decision-making bodies within the school -- school site council, PTA, room-parent, you name it. This small group of women has morphed into a malignant tumor that has effectively killed most, if not all, school spirit, profitable fund-raisers, and congenial parental interaction.

Don't believe me? Think, "How could that happen at such a fine neighborhood school?" I suggest you go look at the current School Site Council membership on the Los Cerritos Elementary website. And then right after that, go to the Los Cerritos Elementary PTA website. You people are smart. You can do the math.. You'll find the culprits. Look what the PTA used to do three, four years ago, versus what they do now. Why the long face? Because the kids suffer. The PTA leadership suffers frrom a severe lack of support and will continue to do so, as long as this group of hens insists upon driving this bus......Sorry, I think I'm digressing again.....

Bottom line, folks. Remember those four tenets that I mentioned before? A good analogy would be to refer to those four tenets as the legs of a chair. Mrs. Price, as one of their legs, is an ineffctive leader. (Hey, we have ineffective people in politics, finance, engineering, science, you name it. Every industry has ineffective people who somehow end up employed there. Where is it written that we cannot publicly question and'or challenge a principal one finds incompetent?) An ineffective principal surrounds herself with bitter women who must have something unfulfilling going in their lives to be so mean-spirited. Those earlier mentioned pit-vipers, at the behest of said principal, spread their cancerous reach to other organizations, and what kind of toxic stew do we have to serve????

Highly divided campus. Principal lacks widespread support. Alienated teachers. PTA heavily unsupported (can't wait for their spin). parent alienation (see PTA comment) That's reality folks. I'm I happy about it? No, frankly it sickens me. Was it avoidable? Absolutely. Unfortunately, you put incompentent leadership in any organization, you're asking for trouble.

Okay, so let's assume that the teacher leg is still solid. The principal leg was a termite appetizer. The PTA was a termite main course. The parent support is wobbly at best.......

How may two-legged chairs would you sit on??

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

Diana Bosetti — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 00:41:21 -0000

Dear, what was it? Conscientious observer?

I find it interesting that you posted this comment just days after the Long Beach Unified School District received five new Uniform Complaints regarding the 2007-2008, and 2008-2009 allocation of funds at Los Cerritos (including the cinnamon roll expenditures). Might you be privy to that information? Regardless, your post to the District Weekly is nothing more than another paper tiger.

We have two issues here that I wish to respond to: 1) Concerns I raised with the LBUSD regarding Principal Lauren Price's management style, and 2) The LBUSD's official policy for the allocation of state and federal funds.

In this post, I will address item number two. A separate post regarding item number one will follow shortly, because I do not wish to confuse these two very legitimate concerns that I've raised over the past two years.

Here goes..... First, you say that I never voted against a single budget. It is my hope that others will follow your suggestion and read the minutes on the school's website, because indeed, I never did vote against a single school site council budget. But, you'll notice that our first meeting was on January 11th -- five months into the school year, when we received a "budget summary" -- a one page word document that "explained where Los Cerritos is spending its categorical funds." PAST TENSE. At that meeting, none of us on the school site council had any clue that money was being misallocated -- a FACT that could not have been gleaned from the one-page word document that we were given. It wasn't until I continuously requested more information about the budget that I would find questionable expenditures, such as an $8,000 line item for office supplies -- which I believe is where the cinnamon roll expenditures were hidden. Would I have voted differently had I known what I know now, absolutely. But, don't forget, I have been, and continue to be, stonewalled at every turn by Robert Williams. He has continuously made it very clear, in writing, that a school site council has no authority over Title I funds, and therefore getting any detailed budgetary information has been and continues to be very difficult.

As for the principal's use of Title I funds for cinnamon rolls, and your assertion that "she stopped doing it on her own." That's highly questionable, to say the least. This expenditure came to light only after a Uniform Complaint was filed with the state. The heat was on, and she made an attempt -- a bad one -- at explaining it. It was school site council chair Monica Hunt (as an elected member of the school site council, her anonymity is no longer an option) who brought the matter to light, when she complained that her kid would no longer be chompin' down on cinnamon rolls, with an exasperated "thanks" that was thrown my way. To which Price replied, "Sorry, we can't do that either." Hardly a heartfelt admission of a "mistake" that they wished to rectify. By the way, anyone can verify this conversation -- the audio recording is available in the school's front office. Also, your sarcasm "oh, what a waste of money that is..." only reinforces my opinion that you, Mrs. Price, Robert Williams, and even Chris Steinhauser, have and will continue to spend state and federal money regardless of what's right and what's legal. So, let me be clear: Paying for cinnamon rolls was a waste of Title I money, not to mention against federal and state education codes. I fail to understand how eating unhealthy food is of a direct educational benefit to the kids who are falling academically behind -- a great majority of whom DO come from poor families. Also, anyone with any common sense is aware that the kids who make the Principal's Honor Roll breakfast tend to not be the same students who are eligilble for Title I. And, even if they did make the cut, it's still a misallocation of funds. Period.

But then, you, and several others, have made it abundantly clear that the law is of no importance. When a "good faith" payment from the school district made its way back to Los Cerritos, Monica Hunt replied "So, we have gained nothing. We took the money from this pile, and put it into this pile." To which Robert Williams replied "That's right." That's comforting. This coming from a man who oversees all the districts' consolidated budgets, and from another who supposedly is a LAUSD teacher and now vice-chair of the Los Cerritos school site council. (All of this is on audio tape too. Just call the Los Cerritos front office at 562/ 595-6337).

So, the principal unilaterally spent state and federal money on things like office furniture and cinnamon rolls without the school site council's knowledge -- followed with childish proclamations that she made a "mistake." (See next post about Lauren Price). You said that "this should have been caught at the district level, but it wasn't." What does that mean? Are you implying that because Mrs. Price wasn't caught, that what she did was right? Don't get me wrong, I think those at the district level are just as culpable, since they are supposed to be the so-called experts. But, how does that make our principal any less responsible? Either we are dealing with intentional misallocations, or incompetence. Either way, our kids, teachers, and the general tax-paying public deserve better from public officials. You also mention that EVERY item that I brought up was corrected immediately. Uh, in case you didn't notice, it took two years and a decision from the Department of Education to get the money back. I do agree with you on one point, however. That it's highly believable that these types of misallocations may have occurred prior to Mrs. Price coming on board. You slam me for not investigating expenditures prior to 2005, yet criticize me for "tarnishing our school immeasurably" by bringing to light expenditures after 2005. Do you see the contradiction?

I know what you're thinking.... then why did I vote for the 2007-2008 budget? In this area, information from the minutes will tell little of what actually transpired. There was no way the school site plan wasn't going to pass by a majority of the school site council. So, I made the best possible motion: To approve it, with an attachment that requested that the LBUSD verify whether we were in violation of federal and state laws that mandate that 85% of the monies be used directly for educational services, and that if we were not compliant, that it come back before the school site council.

Here's what was said:

Diana Bosetti: "Not to beat a dead horse. I want to vote on this, but I am back to the same question on the breakout of the 85/15% rule for each fund, and if it applies to each fund. I do have something here that says that it does. I'm nervous about voting on something where I don't have the full financial figures."

Principal Price responded that we had to vote on the plan that very day, and added that "Once we get the answer to that question, we'll let you know about it, and if we have to make changes based on that we'll make the changes and let you know about the changes made."

The school site council, which leaned heavily in favor of being a rubber stamp, wasn't going to vote against the site plan. Therefore, the best bet for it to be revisited was to ask that it come back should the district agree with my assertions that we weren't following the education codes. I believed that such an approach would at least make those at the top accountable. Not surprisingly, following several emails that went back and forth, the district had no intention of changing anything. In fact, Robert Williams went to disturbing lengths to argue that the budget was compliant. On March 13, 2008, he reworded a portion of an Education Code to support the district's position, and omitted a portion of an official communication from the Department of Education -- again to suggest that the district had the right to spend a large portion of the funds however they deemed fit. All of this was on official district letterhead, and has been forwarded to both the LBUSD (in a Uniform Complaint) and Department of Education. It will be up to the Department of Education to determine whether or not it was an act of fraud.

I also find it interesting that you, and other cheerleaders of the LBUSD, continuously find it necessary to equate my questioning of school site council funds with a disrespect for teachers and students. That's a giant leap, and couldn't be further from the truth. Rather, I would say that lambasting those who try to correct acts of impropriety is the greatest disservice possible to students and their teachers. Also, you place the damage of the school's reputation on my shoulders. That's like blaming a police officer for damaging the reputation of a bank robber. It just doesn't make sense.

Finally, my last point is this: You, and "anonymiss," both take umbrage at Dave Wielenga's, and my, assertions that the misallocations of these funds hurt "poor kids." While it's true that not every recipient of Title I funds are kids from poor families, an overwhelming majority are -- which is why the original marker for identifying these students is through the "free lunch program." This simple truth hits hard, which I'm sure is why you both reacted so strongly to it.

Meanwhile, I leave you with this: You, and others, have accused me of "not thinking of the kids,' and showing a "blatant lack of respect for school staff" -- (That according to an October 10, 2007 letter from Monica Hunt). Let me recap what's transpired over the last two years: The school site council was not a part of, nor privy to the planning process of the school site plan until I made it an issue; the Department of Education ruled that nearly $90,000 of school site council funds were earmarked in direct violation of federal and state education codes; documents regarding the English Learner's Advisory Committee, which contain the signatures of Mrs. Price and Monica Hunt, were turned into the LBUSD in 2006, thus incorrectly attesting that this important body was meeting and providing information to the school site council when no such committee was in existence (see next post); and school site council elections were held out of compliance per the California Department of Education (again, see next post). I, for one, will not blindly support "school staff" in these activities, and if that's considered to be a show of "blatant lact of respect," then so be it. In the end, by bringing these matters to the attention of others, I believe such an action is the truest form of "thinking of the kids."

Sincerely,

Diana Bosetti

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

Conscientious Observer — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 23:18:02 -0000

This is ridiculous! As someone who sat in on some of the site council meetings at Los Cerritos last year and the year before, I feel that I must speak up. I'll be up front and say that I do choose to remain anonymous for two reasons, 1) I have no intention of replying or responding to this blog again, and 2) because I have no desire to get on Diana's "bad side." (Please don’t set a double standard by treating my desire to remain anonymous as you have “Anonymiss,” especially since “Friend to Diana” drew no such censure.) You see, that is exactly what Price did...she got on Diana's bad side (ask Diana about a nasty e-mail she sent regarding a toy she donated to the school), and has had to spend the last 2 years deflecting rumors and innuendo that indicates that she PURPOSEFULLY attempted to deny children at Los Cerritos the education they deserve.

Let's start with a few basics. The title of the story was "No Cinnamon Roll Left Behind," a reference to the fact (Price admitted it in an open meeting - no need to hide, it was just a mistake, right?) that categorical funds were used to buy cinnamon rolls. What Diana failed to mention was that those cinnamon rolls were part of the Los Cerritos Honor Roll Breakfast, held 3 times yearly. After each reporting period, teachers submit the names of students who have maintained the highest marks in the areas of effort, work habits, and personal conduct. It is essentially an honor that every student can achieve, since it’s not tied to grades. These students (there are usually about 200 of them) and their families are invited to come and be honored publicly for behaviors that, if continued, will lead to them becoming adults who will (hold your breath...) arrive to work on time, work hard, and get along with others... Oh my, what a waste of money that one is!

Now of course, no one, including me, excuses an inappropriate usage of funds. Evidently, Price found out after holding 2 of these breakfasts that categorical monies couldn't be used on food items and STOPPED doing so on her own. The question that needs to be asked is: Who approved the purchases? I've learned through my work at the school that all expenditures go through an approval process that extends beyond the school. This should have been caught at the district level, but it wasn't, so Mrs. Price went right on honoring students for their hard work and high levels of effort (“GASP” again!).

When Price explained in an open meeting that we would need to hold off on having the breakfast until another source of funding was secured, she told us that it had been announced to principals that money couldn't be spent on FOOD. (What’s funny is that Diana didn’t even know about this until Price told her and the whole council - sounds like someone who is trying to deliberately hide things, huh?) We could still have an honor roll, and recognize kids; we just couldn't give them anything to eat... I'll tell you, that as a parent of a hard-working child who doesn't always secure 4's on progress reports, this honor roll was a godsend. My child looked forward to that morning, not because of the Cinnamon Roll, but because of the recognition and what it represented. (Thanks to Krispy Kreme and other donors we were able to hold the breakfast in June of last year!)

Let me ask a few questions while we are at it. In the 2 years that Diana was on site council did she EVER vote against a budget? How about the School Plan? How about abstentions on a budget or school plan? Did she ever abstain because she disagreed? I won't answer these questions, but if you really care about the WHOLE truth behind this story, go to the school website and look up the minutes for 2007-08. (I'll include the link at the end of this message to make it easy for you. 06-07 are not posted, but they are public record, so anyone can ask for them.) You may find that her voting record doesn't really match what she's been touting...

I could go on a little farther, but I won't. Those of us who know, know 3 things: 1) Los Cerritos' Site Council is not perfect. Mistakes have been made, many of which pre-date Mrs. Price's arrival, but several during her term which she has fully acknowledged. (Someone who really cared would request the minutes and records for the years prior to 2005-06...remember, they are public records and may also be interesting reading. I wonder if Diana will go back and work to hold the former principal accountable for any missteps? Stay tuned…), 2) EVERY item that has been brought up as a concern that could be handled at the site level was corrected immediately and there have been no repeats, and 3) Diana is obviously out on a very personal vendetta.

If one cared to look at all the underhanded tactics, unsolicited e-mails, and meetings with Price's superiors about everything from her door being closed to her not bringing hot food to a PTA breakfast (for real...), you would be able to see this. I happened to have been a person who was included in Diana’s “special” e-mail listing and who saw the 10- page document that was submitted to district officials outlining all of Price's shortcomings. (Evidently she also didn't stand in front of the school in the mornings like the old principal used to...)

It was only when I saw that Diana had distributed copies of an anti-LBUSD blog (anonymously of course), where the blogger suggested that Mrs. Price was such a "Steinhauser brown-noser," that her parents should purchase "asbestos-impregnated hankies" for [Price] to wipe her nose with as Christmas gifts, that I knew it had gone too far. Anyone who would actually suggest such a thing, and anyone who would support that by contributing to and distributing their blog, most certainly has an axe to grind, and definitely lacks an element of human compassion, and I was in no way going to be a part of that. (I’ll include that link as well…again, just in case truth is relevant.)

In closing, I do hope that Diana is satisfied with receiving her moment of glory. I think everyone (Price included) is happy that the school will be receiving a refund. Unfortunately, this has been accomplished in a way that has tarnished our school immeasurably. Long after Mrs. Price is gone, this "mess" will stick to Los Cerritos. We have a fabulous school, with wonderful teachers and GREAT kids. My only hope is that somehow, we will be able to recover from this and truly begin to move forward.

Signed,
Conscientious Observer

P.S. And for the record…the distribution of Title One funds are determined by the percentage of low-income families in a school, but are used for those students who are not yet proficient, regardless of income. Contrary to popular belief, all poor children are not at-risk…

Links:
http://parents.loscerritos.groupfusion.net

http://www.gabston-howell.org/swl/index.php?/ar...

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

Ron Howarth — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 00:03:53 -0000

My hats off to Diana Bosetti for her investigative nature and sticking to her guns for following this matter up...and at least getting some resoluton on the return of some of the Title I funds. Openness and transparency are vital in politics and the school business. As a former teacher and principal at Los Cerritos, I would have enjoyed working with her as a PTA president and member of the school site council.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

NClanton — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 22:07:16 -0000

I would like to commend Ms. Bosetti for her tenacious efforts on the part of the students of the LBUSD!!!!!! Not many people have the time or energy to take on such issues. I have maintained for as many years as I can remember that school site councils are just another check off for administrators to say they are complying with the law. There is not usually time to question or research the budgets at these meetings and if questions arise they are usually brushed aside and ignored. I believe there are many such errors and misuse of funds here, but don't have the time and energy that she has! The world needs more people like MS. Bosetti. Thanks for your efforts on behalf of these students.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

John_B — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 12:50:05 -0000

LBUSD needs to be reminded that they are a public agency and that their purpose is to serve the electorate in the area of public education.

They shall not dictate terms to us and they must not refuse to be fully responsive to our needs and desires in the area we created them to serve us.

So long as no applicable laws are violated, the terms of their operation and administration should be as WE, not THEY, determine.

The very best means by which we (the electorate) can assure the appropriate level of accountability at this (and really ANY) level of government is to only elect those candidates to our School Board who clearly understand the facts as stated above and by removing those (like Michael Shane Ellis, for instance) who routinely and repeatedly violate the trust we place in them.

The education of our children should be one of society's highest priorities. Those to whom we entrust that education must therefore be held to the highest educational and administrative standards possible.

When those educators and administrators fail us, it's only because we have allowed them to. When we allow them to fail us, we allow them (and ourselves) to fail our children.

When we repeatedly and consistently fail our children, we ultimately doom our entire society to failure and we consign this society to a level of mediocrity that, if we are not very careful, we will not likely find it possible to recover from.

Wake up Long Beach!

Start holding your School District to a higher standard!

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

wrongbeachJohn — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 12:18:48 -0000

While I still plan to vote yes on Prop K, behaviour like this worries me greatly.The LBUSD appear to be masters of cover-up, and their incompetency, poor record keeping, clannish self-defensiveness, and circle-the-wagons mentality is extremely disturbing.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

Friend to Diana — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:36:07 -0000

I am withholding my name for now only because I plan on joining my Long Beach school's site council in the near future and hope I don't face the retribution that I've already faced when I addressed an issue there that no one else liked me addressing. I saw changes made that made myself and others more content, but I too was alone in my quest for fairness just as Diana was much of the time.
No one here mentioned the stress and emotional turmoil that took it's toll on Diana during her fight for WHAT WAS RIGHT. She could have easily dropped everything, like many people wanted her to do, and saved herself so much distress over the situation and the negative reactions (extremely negative reactions) that she was getting. But she held on for others, not for herself. She didn't benefit from a penny of that money!, if anything, this battle cost her.
Diana is a very unselfish, kind, loving person to not only her immediate friends and family, but to the inner and outer community. She instills values in her children that results in them participating in things that help our world on a global scale as well as locally.
How could a person like this, using her enviable journalistic qualities to search for truth, be anything but an asset to Los Cerritos Elementary School?

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

LBUSD Employee — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 23:15:59 -0000

It would be ludicrous to believe Los Cerritos is the only school in the district that has misappropriated Title I other categorical funds. The way the hammer came down on Ms. Bosetti and the amount of energy was expended by high level district administrators you know the district wanted to put an end to this before anyone loooked into other school budgets. Long Beach Unified has a history of trumpeting any success while aggressively keeping the party line that nothing else could ever go wrong. It will be very interesting how the district deals with this problem. Either they can get in front of the misappropriations and honestly deal with them or I'm sure many school sites will find themselves with their own Diana Bosetti.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

Martin Douglas — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 13:42:28 -0000

I thought that this quote is what newspapers should be doing
. "In all life one should comfort the afflicted, but verily, also one should afflict the comfortable, and especially when they are cofortably, contentedly, even happily wrong."
JOhn Kenneth Galbraith
Keep lifting the rocks and shining a light on what they are trying to hide.
Martin

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

Melissa — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 00:38:03 -0000

I think it's obvious that there are other "big trees." Why should Dave have to dumb it down and explain the obvious? Hey, at least seal beach found an amusing way to be a chotch bag.

Dave and Will, you guys are my heroes.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

John_B — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 17:52:05 -0000

wswaim: I’m not nearly as inclined to give Seal Beach the pass that you are. The quote you and Dave wrestled with notwithstanding, the story was about Ms. Bisotti’s struggles and ultimate success in bringing accountability (in this area, at least) to Los Cerritos Elementary School and this, the article did most astutely.

Seal Beach seems to revere balance. If that’s so then perhaps he/she should ease up just a little on the hyper-criticality or, at the very least, try ‘balancing’ his/her pillory with equal measures of very well-deserved praise.

Re: NO CINNAMON ROLL LEFT BEHIND

dksnider — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 11:48:33 -0000

Citizen Journalist Quote of the Day -- “Satire is often strictly defined as a literary genre or form; although, in practice, it is also found in the graphic and performing arts.

“In satire, human or individual vices, follies, abuses, or shortcomings are held up to censure by means of ridicule, derision, burlesque, irony, or other methods, ideally with the intent to bring about improvement. Although satire is usually meant to be funny, the purpose of satire is not primarily humour in itself so much as an attack on something of which the author strongly disapproves, using the weapon of wit.

“A very common, almost defining feature of satire is its strong vein of irony or sarcasm, but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing.”

(Source: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.)