Sponsored by

Comments on

TUSD continues pattern of secrecy with sup't hiring process

TUSD picked four finalists for the district's next leader Tuesday night: B, G, P and W. And as far as they're concerned, right now that's all the public needs to know about who might lead Tucson's largest school district. "Unbelievable," said an expert in public records law.... Read more»

have your say   

16 comments on this story

 1 2 >
1
4 comments
Aug 9, 2017, 7:44 am
-0 +1

Thanks for this very informative article. Grijalva, after 16 years on the Board, and Foster after choosing Sanchez “don’t know enough about the legal issue” to comment? Since both of them were in the middle of the controversy last time, that defies logic (not for the first time!) Yep, transparency is about as present as TRUST among this bickering group of TUSD board members. If you were at the meeting last night, you got to see that on display as board members desperately tried to avoid designating one of them to pass information along—obviously no one trusted any of the others to do so. The names of the candidates will be released within 24 hours, ostensibly to give Dr. Clements the time to contact each of them. There will be public forums with each candidate next week, 7-9 on M, T, W, and TH (if no one drops out) at Catalina High School. Beat the bushes and get the community out as choosing a superintendent has been far too much of an inside job !

2
10 comments
Aug 9, 2017, 9:46 am
-2 +0

The story is incorrect. Of course the board members know the names of the short-listed applicants. The board is following the process announced several months ago, with the advice of the district’s legal counsel. After the applicants confirm their acceptance of the invitation to be interviewed, the consultant will release their names. This should occur soon, probably within a few hours of this post.

3
3 comments
Aug 9, 2017, 12:12 pm
-0 +1

With all due respect Mr. Stegeman, what part of the article is not correct?  The part that TUSD hides PUBLIC RECORDS or the part that TUSD did not and continues to not share the names of the people who were NOT selected.  As a native Tucsonan and TUSD educated and now a proud parent of 4 TUSD students, it is a shame this board continues to operate without our suggestions, opinions, advice, etc.  We should be able to see who you have passed up and why.  If you think this is about the information the district has withheld, you are wrong.  It is about the principle of you remembering who you work for.  US.

4
10 comments
Aug 9, 2017, 12:18 pm
-1 +0

The incorrect part is the claim that I said that even the board members do not know the names. We are following a process, similar to that used by other districts without legal challenge, which recognizes the privacy of applicants as well as the public’s desire for information. After the names are released (I expect very soon), there will be ample opportunity for public comment. I believe that the public input is important.

It is not typical in any personnel process for the public to see the names of persons who do not get to the interview stage.

5
135 comments
Aug 9, 2017, 2:19 pm
-0 +1

Stegeman is clearly not a first amendment nor public records nor right to know expert.
And he’s a pretty lousy school board member as well.

6
3 comments
Aug 9, 2017, 2:48 pm
-0 +0

Again with all due respect, public records can be redacted and furthermore, if a applicant does not want to make his information public but wants public funds and wants to run a public school district, then he should be crossed off of the list.  That tells you how that person feels about transparency. 

Furthermore, the public comments will be only on the selection of the finalists that you have chosen over secret persons who may have been more qualified or who may have been what TUSD needs, which in my opinion is a native Tucsonan who has the love, the desire, the native experience and who has first hand knowledge of who the students will be and the challenges will be.  We will end up with 4 out of staters that have not one bit of Tucson knowledge and we will never know if there was any Tucsonans that were passed up and why.

7
523 comments
Aug 9, 2017, 2:50 pm
-0 +3

Mark, perhaps in your zeal to defend a position that TUSD found to be a legal loser the last time you hired a superintendent, you misspoke regarding the process. But I’ll stand by my reporting that you said last night that you didn’t know the names of the finalists.

If you and the other board members do, so much the more reason that you should not be keeping those identities from the members of the public.

Arizona law and court rulings are clear on the matter: it’s the public’s business to know what you’re doing throughout the hiring process, rather than merely after you’ve reached a decision.

cheers,

d.

8
2 comments
Aug 10, 2017, 11:34 am
-0 +0

There are two candidates from the slithering Sanchez snake inhabited green slime era; they are Marie Marine and Stephen Trejo.  She did little to support principals after she was promoted to position that was meant to do just that. Trejo ran a school. That is all he did. He was hailed by TUSD bureaucrats for running it well and raising achievement. That is what he was supposed to do but it was seen as extraordinary. Trujillo has told principals that they have not met up to professional expectations and he has rattled several cages since he took over his post. By rattled, I mean is now holding accountable. Something very foreign to TUSD for the last 4 years. Trujillo is not from Tucson or the camp of Grijalva-ites. He is neither part of the Stegeman scheme-tank. The Kentucky person should be screened out NOW to avoid further embarrassment. She was probably screened in by Stegeman to make Trejo look stronger. He is just that deviant. 
And as for your very immediate posting of this story, seems to me you had insider scoop (thanks Kristel) in violation of Open Meeting Law. Dylan, it is OK but don’t try to cover your tracks by steaming over the “untimely” release of information from TUSD.
Hey, how come you have not covered the fact that Stephanie Boe resigned? Ya in to not outing those supported by Foster and Grijalva, eh?

9
523 comments
Aug 10, 2017, 12:21 pm
-0 +1

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, TUSD Insider. By “this story,” I believe you mean the report on the release of the identities of the selected finalists, not the analysis piece you posted your comment under: http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/local/report/080917_tusd_finalists/familiar-faces-and-controversial-outsider-as-tusd-releases-list-supt-finalists/

As a rule, we don’t comment on confidential sources, but in this case I can plainly tell you that our source of the information on the finalists names was the mass email sent to the entire Tucson press Wednesday.

If an internal source had provided that information, it would not have had anything to do with the open meeting laws. The board and officials did improperly deny to release the information for a period of time in violation of Arizona’s public records laws, and there are still records that the district has yet to release.

Stefanie Boe was working Wednesday. I don’t have any information on whether she plans to resign as district spokeswoman or not.

Update/edit: Boe has submitted her resignation, effective in two weeks.

10
10 comments
Aug 10, 2017, 1:55 pm
-0 +0

Dylan, then it was a misunderstanding. It would obviously have been impossible for us to review resumes, letters of recommendation, etc., without knowing whom we were reviewing! Maybe what I said was that we did not know the names of the applicants that had been screened out by the committee before the Board met. The substantial difference between the past and present TUSD processes is that, this time, we released the names of everyone who is being interviewed. I am not aware of any legal ruling indicating that the names of applicants who are screened out before reaching an interview must be released, but I will happy to hear qualified legal opinion to the contrary.

11
10 comments
Aug 10, 2017, 2:03 pm
-0 +0

We used essentially the same process recently used by the Amphitheater district, and I am not aware that it caused controversy or attracted legal challenge. The process was recommended by our consultant with the goal of surviving legal challenge, but of course no one will know for sure until and if it is challenged.

12
10 comments
Aug 10, 2017, 2:05 pm
-0 +0

You are right: I have never claimed to be a lawyer. On legal matters I generally rely on TUSD’s legal counsel.

13
523 comments
Aug 10, 2017, 2:49 pm
-0 +0

Mark,

Rather than carefully crafting secretive processes that you think might survive legal challenges, why not just operate in the open? 

Your contentions that secrecy is necessary were laughed out of court by a judge the last time you hired a superintendent. http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/documents/doc/080213_tusd_doc/

14
523 comments
Aug 10, 2017, 2:54 pm
-0 +1

Regarding the reporting of your discussing the process Tuesday, I’ve added a note in the body of the piece.

15
3 comments
Aug 10, 2017, 3:11 pm
-0 +1

Terrible, terrible, terrible. TUSD does not have enough money for glue sticks for my child’s classrooms nor money for teachers raises but TUSD doesn’t mind using public funds to fight keeping public records secret?  Who are you representing again?  How is your existence there a help to us the parents and students?  Please tell me you do not represent the rest of the boards thinking.  If you do, then now is probably a good time to clean house with the board, administration and anyone who believes working for a public entity, especially a school, does not think transparency is important.  All of the back-door deals that were made by Sanchez were kept “secret” by denials of public records.  Is it the TUSD students who are not learning or the board and administrators?

 1 2 >

Join the conversation...

You must be logged in or register to comment

Click to enlarge

Paul Ingram/TucsonSentinel.com

TUSD Board President Michael Hicks and Stegeman during a Feb. 28 meeting.

Categories

news, politics & government, education, media & journalism, local, arizona, opinion, analysis, breaking
Sponsored by

Top Commenters

  • Bret Linden: 1758
  • Dylan Smith: 521
  • Cactus Dave: 339
  • buddhaboy: 316
  • Roberto De Vido: 270
  • Brittanicus: 176
  • Quietwoman2: 172
  • EllieMae: 135
  • TucsonGirl: 116
  • janamg: 88
Sponsored by

Yes!

I want to help TucsonSentinel.com offer a real news alternative!

We're committed to making quality news accessible; we'll never set up a paywall or charge for our site. But we rely on your support to bring you independent news without the spin. Use our convenient PayPal/credit card donation form below or contact us at donate@tucsonsentinel.com today.

Donate securely with PayPal

$5,000 Newshound
$2,500 Copy desk chief
$1,000 Trusted source
$500 Correspondent
$250 Stringer
$100 Cub reporter
$50 Printer's Devil
$25 Informed Source
$10 Dear Reader
Enter your own amount (below)

OR: Subscribe and stretch your donation over time

$5/mo. Printer's Devil
$10/mo. Cub Reporter
$20/mo. Stringer
$40/mo. Correspondent
Enter your own monthly amount (number only)

TucsonSentinel.com is an Arizona nonprofit organization fiscally sponsored by FCIR.org, a 501c3 charity. Your contribution is tax-deductible.

User Guidelines

Please be respectful and relevant. Thought-provoking. Or at least funny.

We want comments to advance the discussion and we need your help. Debate, disagree, yell (digitally) or laugh, but do it with respect.

We won't censor your comments if we don't agree with you; we want viewpoints from across the political spectrum. We're dedicated to sparking an open, active discussion. We believe people with differing opinions can spark debate and effect change.

Comments are open to registered users of TucsonSentinel.com.

Keep in mind:

  • A conversation involves sharing and respect. Support your viewpoint with facts, not attacks.
  • Ask questions. Search out answers.
  • Remember that being part of a community requires tolerance for differing views.
  • We can't ensure that all comments are based in truth. The only comments we endorse are those we write ourselves.

TucsonSentinel.com does not allow:

  • Hate speech. Blatantly racist, sexist or homophobic slurs or calls for violence against a particular type of person, etc. will be removed.
  • Obscenity & excessive cursing. Sometimes a well-placed curse word - if you're creative enough to get it past our auto-censor - can express your point in just the right way. But we say '%*$& no' to cursing for cursing's sake. And lose the explicit sexually-descriptive language. It doesn't contribute to the debate and there are plenty of other places on the Internet to find it.
  • Flaming. During a heated discussion, unkind words may be spoken. We can live with a certain amount of rudeness in the name of provocative conversation, but a pattern of personal attacks (name-calling, mocking, or baiting) is not acceptable nor are threatening or harassing comments. Show some respect, please.
  • Explicit political endorsements. As a nonprofit we can't allow electioneering. Analysis and explanation of political issues and candidates are encouraged, but specific calls to vote for or against a measure or politician should be done elsewhere.
  • Spam. Solicitation of products or services isn't allowed; contact us about advertising, we'd love to talk to you. Links to off-topic sites may be deleted.
  • Copyright or IP infringement. Lengthy quotes and violations of 'Fair Use' aren't allowed. Anything you post should be your own work.
  • Overposting. Don't bore people and waste electrons with identical comments on multiple stories or repetitive comments that don't advance a conversation.
  • Trolling, sockpuppetry, and other abusive behavior. Please don't feed the trolls and don't pretend to be someone you're not.
  • Gossip. Don't bring up others who can't defend themselves. We don't give out personal information; you shouldn't either.

Comments that violate these guidelines may be removed. We reserve the right to make up the rules as we go along.

Flagging

Commentors are solely responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. Users who violate these standards may lose their privileges on TucsonSentinel.com.

Sentinel editors can't read every comment. Trolls, spammers and other troublemakers can slide under the bridge. We rely on you to help maintain a healthy conversation - more than likely, you're reading these comments before the editors.

What if you see something inappropriate? Use the 'Flag' button to send it to a moderation queue. Help us out and tell us why you're reporting it; please don't report someone just because you disagree with them. Boy who cried wolf and all that. We'll take appropriate action on violations.

We will not edit comments to alter their meaning or censor comments because of political content.

We will not remove comments solely because they are heartless, cruel, coarse, foolish or just plain wrong. Your disapproval can maintain a decent signal to noise ratio. Ultimately, however, self-policing is the best method.

Bottom line, don't be a jerk.

Sign up for TucsonSentinel.com email newsletters!

find us on facebook
Sponsored by
Sponsored by
Sponsored by