E Stone Emails Nov Dec

Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Wednesday, January 09, 2013 12:36 PM Jeff Charis Carlson Board; council@iowa-city.org Equity Editorial
For at least fifteen years there has been a struggle going on in our community between two competing concepts of public education. Some believe that the tax-supported educational resources in our community should be distributed equally while others feel that inequality is a fact of life and that it is desirable to have some schools with significantly better physical facilities, curricular opportunities and socioeconomic status than others. School board after school board and superintendent after superintendent have ignored the growing disparities and in some cases have even taken actions to make them worse. As a result, the average school on one side of our district has gotten newer and newer while the average school on the other side has gotten older and older. The average school in Iowa City is now more than twice as old as the average school in Coralville and more than three times as old as the average school in North Liberty. Five new schools have been built in the latter two cities in the past 15 years while no new elementary or junior high schools have been built in Iowa City. Schools in the newer parts of our community are much more likely to be air conditioned, ADA compliant and free of lead paint and asbestos than schools in the older parts. During the past fifteen years our districts schools have also become dramatically segregated along socioeconomic lines. Today, only 5.9% of the students in one of our elementary schools qualify for free and reduced lunch while 78.6% of the students in another elementary qualify for this support. There is a large body of literature showing a relationship between the average socioeconomic status of a school and the academic performance of its students. And, school districts that have taken steps to balance the socioeconomic parameters of their schools have found that students at both ends of the socioeconomic spectrum benefit from such balance. For these and other reasons some members of our current school board feel that equity of facilities, curriculum and socioeconomic status are very important for public schools. They have drafted a policy that is designed to reduce the disparities in socioeconomic status among our schools and to make sure that our existing secondary schools are fully and equally utilized before building new ones. This marks a very critical point in the evolution of our community. The disparities in our schools are already so stark that if we do not take aggressive steps to reduce them it is unlikely that we ever will. The effect of this disparity on our communitys many neighborhoods is nearing the point of no return because in addition to their primary role of educating our children, schools set the tone for the economic health and well being of neighborhoods. Dilapidated old schools foster dilapidated old neighborhoods and well-maintained schools foster healthy well-maintained neighborhoods. The board members who have crafted the equity policy deserve a tremendous amount of respect and appreciation from our community. Equity always sounds great in principle, but it is usually very difficult to achieve in the real world. Fifty-nine years ago, the Supreme Court did the right thing when they acknowledged that segregation of schools was inherently unequal and hence unconstitutional. Our community should recognize the analogy between this landmark decision and our current situation and support our school board in the community saving actions they are taking. Ed Stone
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Wednesday, January 09, 2013 11:42 AM Edwin Stone RE: Draft editorial for your comments
I find your op ed remarkably conciliatory. Send it in, it is from you. ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 10:03 AM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Re: Draft editorial for your comments Any suggestions for mine or is it "good to go"? Ed
On Jan 9, 2013, at 9:06 AM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > I am doing one, too. > > Sarah > > ________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 11:34 PM > To: Sarah Swisher > Subject: Draft editorial for your comments > > Hi Sarah, > > I will submit this shortly after noon tomorrow. Let me know if you > have any suggestions. > > Thanks, > > Ed > > For at least ten years there has been a struggle going on in our > community between two competing concepts of public education. Some > believe that the tax-supported educational resources in our community > should be distributed equally while others feel that inequality is a > fact of life and that it is desirable to have some schools with > significantly better physical facilities, curricular opportunities and > socioeconomic status than others. School board after school board and > superintendent after superintendent have ignored the growing > disparities and in some cases have even taken actions to make the > disparities worse. As a result, the average school on one side of our > district has gotten newer and newer while the average school on the > other side has gotten older and older. The average school in Iowa City
2
> is now more than twice as old as the average school in Coralville and > more than three times as old as the average school in North Liberty. > Five new schools have been built in the latter two cities in the past > 15 years while no new elementary or junior high schools have been > built in Iowa City. During this period our districts schools have > also become dramatically segregated along socioeconomic lines. Today, > 5.9% of the students in one of our elementary schools qualify for free > and reduced lunch while 78.6% of the students in another elementary > qualify for this support. > > There is a large body of literature showing a relationship between the > average socioeconomic status of a school and the academic performance > of its students. And, school districts that have taken steps to > balance the socioeconomic parameters of their schools have found that > students at both ends of the socioeconomic spectrum benefit from such > balance. For these and other reasons some members of our current > school board feel that equity of facilities, curriculum and > socioeconomic status are very important for public schools. They have > drafted a policy that is designed to reduce the disparities in > socioeconomic status among our schools and make sure that our existing > secondary schools are fully and equally utilized before building new > ones. We are at a very critical point in the evolution of our > community. The disparities in our schools are already so stark that > if we do not take aggressive steps to reduce them it is unlikely that > we ever will. It is also important to realize that in addition to > their primary role of educating our children, schools set the tone for > the economic health and well being of neighborhoods. Dilapidated old > schools foster dilapidated old neighborhoods and well-maintained > schools foster healthy well- maintained neighborhoods. > > The board members who have crafted the equity policy deserve a > tremendous amount of appreciation from our community. Equity always > sounds great in principle, but it is usually very difficult to achieve > in the real world. Fifty-nine years ago, the Supreme Court did the > right thing when they acknowledged that segregation of schools was > inherently unequal and hence unconstitutional. Our community should > recognize the analogy between this landmark decision and our current > situation and support our school board in the very important action > they are taking.
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Wednesday, January 09, 2013 10:03 AM Sarah Swisher Re: Draft editorial for your comments
Any suggestions for mine or is it "good to go"? Ed
On Jan 9, 2013, at 9:06 AM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > I am doing one, too. > > Sarah > > ________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 11:34 PM > To: Sarah Swisher > Subject: Draft editorial for your comments > > Hi Sarah, > > I will submit this shortly after noon tomorrow. Let me know if you > have any suggestions. > > Thanks, > > Ed > > For at least ten years there has been a struggle going on in our > community between two competing concepts of public education. Some > believe that the tax-supported educational resources in our community > should be distributed equally while others feel that inequality is a > fact of life and that it is desirable to have some schools with > significantly better physical facilities, curricular opportunities and > socioeconomic status than others. School board after school board and > superintendent after superintendent have ignored the growing > disparities and in some cases have even taken actions to make the > disparities worse. As a result, the average school on one side of our > district has gotten newer and newer while the average school on the > other side has gotten older and older. The average school in Iowa City > is now more than twice as old as the average school in Coralville and > more than three times as old as the average school in North Liberty. > Five new schools have been built in the latter two cities in the past > 15 years while no new elementary or junior high schools have been > built in Iowa City. During this period our districts schools have > also become dramatically segregated along socioeconomic lines. Today, > 5.9% of the students in one of our elementary schools qualify for free > and reduced lunch while 78.6% of the students in another elementary
4
> qualify for this support. > > There is a large body of literature showing a relationship between the > average socioeconomic status of a school and the academic performance > of its students. And, school districts that have taken steps to > balance the socioeconomic parameters of their schools have found that > students at both ends of the socioeconomic spectrum benefit from such > balance. For these and other reasons some members of our current > school board feel that equity of facilities, curriculum and > socioeconomic status are very important for public schools. They have > drafted a policy that is designed to reduce the disparities in > socioeconomic status among our schools and make sure that our existing > secondary schools are fully and equally utilized before building new > ones. We are at a very critical point in the evolution of our > community. The disparities in our schools are already so stark that > if we do not take aggressive steps to reduce them it is unlikely that > we ever will. It is also important to realize that in addition to > their primary role of educating our children, schools set the tone for > the economic health and well being of neighborhoods. Dilapidated old > schools foster dilapidated old neighborhoods and well-maintained > schools foster healthy well- maintained neighborhoods. > > The board members who have crafted the equity policy deserve a > tremendous amount of appreciation from our community. Equity always > sounds great in principle, but it is usually very difficult to achieve > in the real world. Fifty-nine years ago, the Supreme Court did the > right thing when they acknowledged that segregation of schools was > inherently unequal and hence unconstitutional. Our community should > recognize the analogy between this landmark decision and our current > situation and support our school board in the very important action > they are taking.
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Wednesday, January 09, 2013 9:07 AM Edwin Stone RE: Draft editorial for your comments
I am doing one, too. Sarah From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 11:34 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Draft editorial for your comments Hi Sarah, I will submit this shortly after noon tomorrow. Let me know if you have any suggestions. Thanks, Ed
For at least ten years there has been a struggle going on in our community between two competing concepts of public education. Some believe that the tax-supported educational resources in our community should be distributed equally while others feel that inequality is a fact of life and that it is desirable to have some schools with significantly better physical facilities, curricular opportunities and socioeconomic status than others. School board after school board and superintendent after superintendent have ignored the growing disparities and in some cases have even taken actions to make the disparities worse. As a result, the average school on one side of our district has gotten newer and newer while the average school on the other side has gotten older and older. The average school in Iowa City is now more than twice as old as the average school in Coralville and more than three times as old as the average school in North Liberty. Five new schools have been built in the latter two cities in the past 15 years while no new elementary or junior high schools have been built in Iowa City. During this period our districts schools have also become dramatically segregated along socioeconomic lines. Today, 5.9% of the students in one of our elementary schools qualify for free and reduced lunch while 78.6% of the students in another elementary qualify for this support.
There is a large body of literature showing a relationship between the average socioeconomic status of a school and the academic performance of its students. And, school districts that have taken steps to balance the socioeconomic parameters of their schools have found that students at both ends of the socioeconomic spectrum benefit from such balance. For these and other reasons some members of our current school board feel that equity of facilities, curriculum and socioeconomic status are very important for public schools. They have drafted a policy that is designed to reduce the disparities in socioeconomic status among our schools and make sure that our existing secondary schools are fully and equally utilized before building new ones. We are at a very critical point in the evolution of our
6
community. The disparities in our schools are already so stark that if we do not take aggressive steps to reduce them it is unlikely that we ever will. It is also important to realize that in addition to their primary role of educating our children, schools set the tone for the economic health and well being of neighborhoods. Dilapidated old schools foster dilapidated old neighborhoods and well-maintained schools foster healthy well-maintained neighborhoods.
The board members who have crafted the equity policy deserve a tremendous amount of appreciation from our community. Equity always sounds great in principle, but it is usually very difficult to achieve in the real world. Fifty-nine years ago, the Supreme Court did the right thing when they acknowledged that segregation of schools was inherently unequal and hence unconstitutional. Our community should recognize the analogy between this landmark decision and our current situation and support our school board in the very important action they are taking.
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Tuesday, January 08, 2013 11:35 PM Sarah Swisher Draft editorial for your comments
Hi Sarah, I will submit this shortly after noon tomorrow. Let me know if you have any suggestions. Thanks, Ed
For at least ten years there has been a struggle going on in our community between two competing concepts of public education. Some believe that the tax-supported educational resources in our community should be distributed equally while others feel that inequality is a fact of life and that it is desirable to have some schools with significantly better physical facilities, curricular opportunities and socioeconomic status than others. School board after school board and superintendent after superintendent have ignored the growing disparities and in some cases have even taken actions to make the disparities worse. As a result, the average school on one side of our district has gotten newer and newer while the average school on the other side has gotten older and older. The average school in Iowa City is now more than twice as old as the average school in Coralville and more than three times as old as the average school in North Liberty. Five new schools have been built in the latter two cities in the past 15 years while no new elementary or junior high schools have been built in Iowa City. During this period our districts schools have also become dramatically segregated along socioeconomic lines. Today, 5.9% of the students in one of our elementary schools qualify for free and reduced lunch while 78.6% of the students in another elementary qualify for this support.
There is a large body of literature showing a relationship between the average socioeconomic status of a school and the academic performance of its students. And, school districts that have taken steps to balance the socioeconomic parameters of their schools have found that students at both ends of the socioeconomic spectrum benefit from such balance. For these and other reasons some members of our current school board feel that equity of facilities, curriculum and socioeconomic status are very important for public schools. They have drafted a policy that is designed to reduce the disparities in socioeconomic status among our schools and make sure that our existing secondary schools are fully and equally utilized before building new ones. We are at a very critical point in the evolution of our community. The disparities in our schools are already so stark that if we do not take aggressive steps to reduce them it is unlikely that we ever will. It is also important to realize that in addition to their primary role of educating our children, schools set the tone for the economic health and well being of neighborhoods. Dilapidated old schools foster dilapidated old neighborhoods and well-maintained schools foster healthy well-maintained neighborhoods.
The board members who have crafted the equity policy deserve a tremendous amount of appreciation from our community. Equity always sounds great in principle, but it is usually very difficult to achieve in the real world. Fifty-nine years ago, the Supreme Court did the right thing when they acknowledged that segregation of schools was inherently unequal and hence unconstitutional. Our community should recognize the analogy between this landmark decision and our current situation and support our school board in the very important action they are taking.
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Tuesday, January 08, 2013 9:10 AM Please support equity in our schools
Dear Friends, For at least ten years there has been a struggle going on in our community between two competing ideologies. Some believe that the educational resources in our community should be distributed equally. Others feel that socioeconomic segregation is a fact of life and that it is OK (perhaps even desirable) to have some schools with significantly better physical facilities, curricular opportunities and socioeconomic status than others. The socioeconomic stratification of our community has been progressively worsening over the past ten years and has now reached the point that in one elementary school 5.9% of students qualify for free and reduced lunch while in another 78.6% qualify. One high school is 7.3% over its capacity while another is 11.7% under capacity. As you may know, the current school board has drafted and is poised to enact a policy that would put the brakes on this worsening disparity. I have read this policy in detail and I think that it is excellent and long overdue. I think that the board members who crafted it and who are now supporting it deserve our thanks and support.
Please take a moment to write an email to the board (board@iccsd.k12.ia.us) and let them know that you favor equity in our schools and that you
support and appreciate their efforts to restore it. It is very important for them to hear from you right now because those who believe in maintaining and/or worsening the disparate status quo are actively making their opinions known by multiple means. If you have any questions about the equity policy or its potential effects on our schools and our community, I would be happy to discuss them with you. Please feel free to call me or send an email to this address. Finally, if you can, please consider attending the special school board meeting that will be held this Saturday morning at 10 AM at 1725 North Dodge Street. Equity in public education doesn't happen by accident. It only happens when the community works hard to make it happen. Thanks to the courage and vision of our current school board, we are closer to this goal now than we have been in decades. Regards, Ed
10
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Sarah Swisher Sunday, January 06, 2013 5:48 PM Edwin Stone Governance Draft 1.7 Draft 1.7.12 Governance.docx
Can you give me a call with concerns or questions? Also I really support an additional board meeting next Saturday to facilitate community education, esp. given letters from Jerry et al last week. Sarah
11
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Friday, January 04, 2013 7:56 PM Sarah Swisher Re: ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists
Great response, Sarah. Regards, Ed
On Jan 4, 2013, at 7:33 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > What is the quality of your intent? > > Certain people have a way of saying things that shake us at the core. > Even when the words do not seem harsh or offensive, the impact is > shattering. What we could be experiencing is the intent behind the > words. When we intend to do good, we do. When we intend to do harm, it > happens. What each of us must come to realize is that our intent > always comes through. We cannot sugarcoat the feelings in our heart of > hearts. The emotion is the energy that motivates. We cannot ignore > what we really want to create. We should be honest and do it the way > we feel it. What we owe to ourselves and everyone around is to examine > the reasons of our true intent. > > My intent will be evident in the results. > > Thurgood Marshall, Brown vs. BOE 1954 > > ________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 7:31 PM > To: Board > Cc: council@iowa-city.org; Stephen Murley > Subject: Fwd: ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists > > Dear Board Members, > > On the 19th of December, Gregg Shoultz of Northwest Junior High used > his ICCSD email address to send an email to hundreds of families with > children at Northwest giving his personal opinions about the equity > policy currently under consideration by the board. > > I asked Mr. Murley on four different occasions (Dec 22, Dec 28, Dec > 31 and Jan 3) whether he thought it was appropriate, ethical and legal > for a secondary principal to use his or her ICCSD email address and > confidential address lists to express personal political opinions. > > Mr. Murley has chosen to not reply to any of these queries.
12
> > Today, Mr. Schultz, Ms. Fry and Dr. Arganbright sent a jointly signed > letter on West High letterhead to a bit more than half of the families > in the district who have children in secondary school. The letter is > ostensibly informational. It tells the reader that the board is > "anxious for feedback" and provides the board's email address. You > have all no doubt received numerous emails today from recipients of > this letter who are now worried that their child will be reassigned to > a different school next year. > > Are the east side secondary principals supposed to get together now > and hurriedly craft a letter/email to "their parents" with "their > summary" of what the equity policy may mean to the children of our > community? > > West vs East, us vs them, pitchforks and burning pine knots, right? > > WRONG! > > I believe that the majority of the community and the majority of the > current school board members want to use our community's educational > tax dollars to benefit every child in our district equally. From my > perspective the board is on a solid course toward this outcome and I > believe that this outcome will be good for everyone in the district > for many years to come. > > So, how do we stop all of this "us vs. them" stuff? How do we stop > the fear mongering? > > 1) Continue to conduct televised public board meetings with published > written minutes and invite all members of the community to get their > information about board activities first hand, or from the newspaper, > or from some private citizen who is using his or her own resources to > convey his or her own opinion (the cornerstone of our democracy). > > 2) Ask Mr. Murley to send a letter to all district principals telling > them that it is inappropriate to use district email accounts, district > letterheads, and district mailing lists to express any political > opinions and that this prohibition includes communications designed to > "alert" families to topics currently under consideration by the board > and/or suggestions that the recipients contact the board to voice > their opinions. > > 3) Pass the equity policy on January 15th and banish significant > educational disparity from the ICCSD forever. > > Regards, > > Ed > > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Edwin Stone
13
> <stone.edwin@gmail.com<mailto:stone.edwin@gmail.com>> > Date: December 31, 2012 11:39:37 AM CST > To: Stephen Murley > <Murley.Stephen@iccsd.k12.ia.us<mailto:Murley.Stephen@iccsd.k12.ia.us > >> > Cc: Board <Board@iccsd.k12.ia.us<mailto:Board@iccsd.k12.ia.us>>, > council@iowa-city.org <mailto:council@iowa-city.org> > Subject: Fwd: ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists > > Hi Steve, > > The question I posed last week (see below) seems pretty > straightforward to me. > > I remain very interested in your answer. > > Regards, > > Ed > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Edwin Stone > <stone.edwin@gmail.com<mailto:stone.edwin@gmail.com>> > Date: December 28, 2012 8:50:37 AM CST > To: Stephen Murley > <Murley.Stephen@iccsd.k12.ia.us<mailto:Murley.Stephen@iccsd.k12.ia.us > >> > Cc: Board <Board@iccsd.k12.ia.us<mailto:Board@iccsd.k12.ia.us>>, > council@iowa-city.org <mailto:council@iowa-city.org> > Subject: ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists > > Hi Steve, > > I am writing to ask you whether you think it is appropriate, ethical, > and legal for a secondary school principal to use his or her ICCSD > email account and the email addresses of hundreds of families with > children attending his or her school to express personal political > opinions? > > Regards, > > Ed > > > >
14
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Sarah Swisher Friday, January 04, 2013 7:33 PM Edwin Stone; Board council@iowa-city.org; Stephen Murley RE: ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists
What is the quality of your intent? Certain people have a way of saying things that shake us at the core. Even when the words do not seem harsh or offensive, the impact is shattering. What we could be experiencing is the intent behind the words. When we intend to do good, we do. When we intend to do harm, it happens. What each of us must come to realize is that our intent always comes through. We cannot sugarcoat the feelings in our heart of hearts. The emotion is the energy that motivates. We cannot ignore what we really want to create. We should be honest and do it the way we feel it. What we owe to ourselves and everyone around is to examine the reasons of our true intent. My intent will be evident in the results.
Thurgood Marshall, Brown vs. BOE 1954 From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 7:31 PM To: Board Cc: council@iowa-city.org; Stephen Murley Subject: Fwd: ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists Dear Board Members, On the 19th of December, Gregg Shoultz of Northwest Junior High used his ICCSD email address to send an email to hundreds of families with children at Northwest giving his personal opinions about the equity policy currently under consideration by the board. I asked Mr. Murley on four different occasions (Dec 22, Dec 28, Dec 31 and Jan 3) whether he thought it was appropriate, ethical and legal for a secondary principal to use his or her ICCSD email address and confidential address lists to express personal political opinions. Mr. Murley has chosen to not reply to any of these queries. Today, Mr. Schultz, Ms. Fry and Dr. Arganbright sent a jointly signed letter on West High letterhead to a bit more than half of the families in the district who have children in secondary school. The letter is ostensibly informational. It tells the reader that the board is "anxious for feedback" and provides the board's email address. You have all no doubt received numerous emails today from recipients of this letter who are now worried that their child will be reassigned to a different school next year. Are the east side secondary principals supposed to get together now and hurriedly craft a letter/email to "their parents" with "their summary" of what the equity policy may mean to the children of our community? West vs East, us vs them, pitchforks and burning pine knots, right? WRONG! I believe that the majority of the community and the majority of the current school board members want to use our community's educational tax dollars to benefit every child in our district equally. From my perspective the board is on a
15
solid course toward this outcome and I believe that this outcome will be good for everyone in the district for many years to come. So, how do we stop all of this "us vs. them" stuff? How do we stop the fear mongering? 1) Continue to conduct televised public board meetings with published written minutes and invite all members of the community to get their information about board activities first hand, or from the newspaper, or from some private citizen who is using his or her own resources to convey his or her own opinion (the cornerstone of our democracy). 2) Ask Mr. Murley to send a letter to all district principals telling them that it is inappropriate to use district email accounts, district letterheads, and district mailing lists to express any political opinions and that this prohibition includes communications designed to "alert" families to topics currently under consideration by the board and/or suggestions that the recipients contact the board to voice their opinions. 3) Pass the equity policy on January 15th and banish significant educational disparity from the ICCSD forever. Regards, Ed
Begin forwarded message:
From: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Date: December 31, 2012 11:39:37 AM CST To: Stephen Murley <Murley.Stephen@iccsd.k12.ia.us> Cc: Board <Board@iccsd.k12.ia.us>, council@iowa-city.org Subject: Fwd: ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists
Hi Steve, The question I posed last week (see below) seems pretty straightforward to me. I remain very interested in your answer. Regards, Ed Begin forwarded message:
From: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Date: December 28, 2012 8:50:37 AM CST To: Stephen Murley <Murley.Stephen@iccsd.k12.ia.us> Cc: Board <Board@iccsd.k12.ia.us>, council@iowa-city.org Subject: ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists
Hi Steve, I am writing to ask you whether you think it is appropriate, ethical, and legal for a secondary school principal to use his or her ICCSD email account and the email addresses of hundreds of families with children attending his or her school to express personal political opinions? Regards, Ed
16
17
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Friday, January 04, 2013 7:32 PM Board council@iowa-city.org; Stephen Murley Fwd: ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists
Dear Board Members, On the 19th of December, Gregg Shoultz of Northwest Junior High used his ICCSD email address to send an email to hundreds of families with children at Northwest giving his personal opinions about the equity policy currently under consideration by the board. I asked Mr. Murley on four different occasions (Dec 22, Dec 28, Dec 31 and Jan 3) whether he thought it was appropriate, ethical and legal for a secondary principal to use his or her ICCSD email address and confidential address lists to express personal political opinions. Mr. Murley has chosen to not reply to any of these queries. Today, Mr. Schultz, Ms. Fry and Dr. Arganbright sent a jointly signed letter on West High letterhead to a bit more than half of the families in the district who have children in secondary school. The letter is ostensibly informational. It tells the reader that the board is "anxious for feedback" and provides the board's email address. You have all no doubt received numerous emails today from recipients of this letter who are now worried that their child will be reassigned to a different school next year. Are the east side secondary principals supposed to get together now and hurriedly craft a letter/email to "their parents" with "their summary" of what the equity policy may mean to the children of our community? West vs East, us vs them, pitchforks and burning pine knots, right? WRONG! I believe that the majority of the community and the majority of the current school board members want to use our community's educational tax dollars to benefit every child in our district equally. From my perspective the board is on a solid course toward this outcome and I believe that this outcome will be good for everyone in the district for many years to come. So, how do we stop all of this "us vs. them" stuff? How do we stop the fear mongering? 1) Continue to conduct televised public board meetings with published written minutes and invite all members of the community to get their information about board activities first hand, or from the newspaper, or from some private citizen who is using his or her own resources to convey his or her own opinion (the cornerstone of our democracy). 2) Ask Mr. Murley to send a letter to all district principals telling them that it is inappropriate to use district email accounts, district letterheads, and district mailing lists to express any political opinions and that this prohibition includes communications designed to "alert" families to topics currently under consideration by the board and/or suggestions that the recipients contact the board to voice their opinions.
18
3) Pass the equity policy on January 15th and banish significant educational disparity from the ICCSD forever. Regards, Ed
Begin forwarded message:

From: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Date: December 31, 2012 11:39:37 AM CST To: Stephen Murley <Murley.Stephen@iccsd.k12.ia.us> Cc: Board <Board@iccsd.k12.ia.us>, council@iowa-city.org Subject: Fwd: ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists
19
NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email server are archived in accordance with District policy and procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
20
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Friday, January 04, 2013 2:13 PM Edwin Stone RE: Time for a short call?
I am home now from 2 concerning meetings. will be here for duration of day. sarah ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 1:27 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Re: Time for a short call? What time is best for you? Regards, Ed
On Jan 4, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > Yes...things are heating up. Sarah > > ________________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 7:26 AM > To: Sarah Swisher; Sarah Swisher > Subject: Time for a short call? > > Hi Sarah, > > Do you have time for a short call in the next few days? > > Nothing urgent. > > Regards, > > Ed
21
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Friday, January 04, 2013 1:28 PM Sarah Swisher Re: Time for a short call?
What time is best for you? Regards, Ed
On Jan 4, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > Yes...things are heating up. Sarah > > ________________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 7:26 AM > To: Sarah Swisher; Sarah Swisher > Subject: Time for a short call? > > Hi Sarah, > > Do you have time for a short call in the next few days? > > Nothing urgent. > > Regards, > > Ed
22
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Friday, January 04, 2013 10:39 AM Edwin Stone RE: Time for a short call?
Yes...things are heating up. Sarah ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 7:26 AM To: Sarah Swisher; Sarah Swisher Subject: Time for a short call? Hi Sarah, Do you have time for a short call in the next few days? Nothing urgent. Regards, Ed
23
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Friday, January 04, 2013 7:27 AM Sarah Swisher; Sarah Swisher Time for a short call?
Hi Sarah, Do you have time for a short call in the next few days? Nothing urgent. Regards, Ed
24
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Monday, December 31, 2012 11:40 AM Stephen Murley Board; council@iowa-city.org Fwd: ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists
25
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Friday, December 28, 2012 8:51 AM Stephen Murley Board; council@iowa-city.org ICCSD email accounts and parent mailing lists
26
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Thursday, December 27, 2012 9:35 AM Stephen Murley Board; council@iowa-city.org Re: Gregg Shoultz
Hi Steve, Have you or a member of your administrative team sent any communication to the people under your supervision about the use of ICCSD email accounts and confidential email lists for distributing personal political opinions? Regards, Ed
On Dec 26, 2012, at 9:40 AM, Stephen Murley wrote:

GoodMorningDr.Stone, Thankyouforforwardingthemessageandforyourthoughtsregardingthecontent.Ididnotreceivethisemailpriorto yourforward.Iwillworkwithouradministrativeteamtoaddressthecontentandprocess. Steve
Stephen F. Murley
Superintendent of Schools Iowa City Community School District 1725 North Dodge Street Iowa City, IA 52245-9589 Phone: 319-688-1000 Fax: 319-688-1009 Web: http://www.iowacityschools.org Community Engagement: http://www.engageiowacityschools.org
<image003.jpg>
From: Edwin Stone [mailto:stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2012 4:35 PM To: Stephen Murley Cc: Board; council@iowa-city.org Subject: Gregg Shoultz
Hi Steve, I am writing to ask you whether you think it is appropriate, ethical, and legal for Gregg Shoultz to use his ICCSD email account and the email addresses of the hundreds of families with children at Northwest Junior High to advance his personal political agenda (see below)?
27
If the board wished to send out a factual message about the diversity policy currently under consideration to families with students in the district, they could craft the language themselves and ask your office to send it out. It does not seem helpful or balanced to have a secondary principal send out a message with inflammatory phrases like "surfaced last week", "even more muddy" "current 8th graders in our district will be assigned to a school that they are not currently planning to attend", "extremely over-crowded before any new facility could be constructed", and "accept the consequences later". All citizens in our community are entitled to their opinions, but I do not think that school officials should be allowed to use their positions of influence and the confidential email lists that they have access to to amplify their voices -- especially if their voices are raised in opposition to equal treatment of all students in the district. I would appreciate it if you would communicate with Mr. Shoultz and all employees of the district and let them know that it is improper to use school email accounts, email address lists, and other public resources to express personal opinions in this manner. Regards, Ed
From:Shoultz.Gregg@iccsd.k12.ia.us Date:Wed,19Dec201215:22:260600 Subject:NWeNewsletter To: DearParents, Ihaveafewitemsofinteresttosendhomeforthewinterbreak: BoardHappeningsEquityPolicy IattendedameetingoftheICCSDschoolboardlastnightandlearnedalittlemoreaboutanewequitypolicy thatsurfacedlastweek.Ihaveattachedthepolicytothisemailforparentstoreview.Inlookingatthe elementarypartofthepolicyitseemslikeanhonestattempttoreigninsomeobviousdisparities.Itreminded meofwhattheICCSDadministrationwasabletodowhenBorlaugElementarywasbroughtonlinethisyear. PriortoBorlaugopening,Rooseveltwasahighpovertyschool(over50%)whileHornandWeberwere relativelylowpovertyschools.WithBorlaugnowonline,allthreeschoolsareinthe3033%freeandreduced lunchrangefortheirstudentpopulations.Thepolicygivesthesuperintendentfiveyearstobringthe elementaryschoolsincompliance.Thisisenoughtimetoplannewbuildingsandadditionswhichcouldgoa longwayinequalizingsomedisparity. ImlesscertainwhatthepolicywouldmeanforNorthwestandthetwohighschools.Inadditiontoequalizing thefreeandreducedlunchpopulationbetweenandamongtheschools,thepolicyalsohasstrictlanguage regardingbuildingutilization.Therearetimeswhenthepolicycallsforthejuniorhighstofallunderthesame categoryastheelementaryschools,andothertimesthepolicyreferstosecondaryschools.NW,SouthEast andNorthCentralaretypicallyconsideredsecondaryschools.Undermyreadingoftheproposedpolicy,there wouldhavetosomeshiftingofstudentsintheshorttermfromeitherSEorNCinorderforNWtobeutilized at90to95%ofcapacity.Ithinkitwouldbehelpfultounderstandhowthepolicywillbeenactedpriortoit becomingthelawoftheland.Thehighschoollevelseemsevenmoremuddy.Accordingthepolicy,the superintendentwouldhaveonlyoneyeartocomeintocompliancewitheitherthebuildingutilization provisionortheequityprovision.Thiswouldmostlikelymeanthatcurrent8thgradersinourdistrictwillbe assignedtoahighschoolthattheyarenotcurrentlyplanningtoattend.Mostlylikelythiswillmeanmore8th gradersfromNWorNCassignedtoCityHighnextyear.Itisalsolessclearhowanyothersecondaryschool
28
couldbebuiltwiththispolicy.TheutilizationrequirementswillmeanthatbothWestandCitywillhavetobe extremelyovercrowdedbeforeanynewfacilitycouldbeconstructed. Whenpassinganewboardpolicy,thenormalpracticeistopresentthepolicyatanopenmeetingthreetimes. Thereisapossibility,however,thatboardwillwaivethesecondreadinginordertopassthispolicyonJanuary 15.Ihopethisisnotthecaseasthisisanimportantpolicypropositionanditdeservesthoughtful consideration.Theimpactofthispolicyislikelytobedramatic,soitisimportantforourcommunitytoknow andunderstandthepolicynow,inordertoaccepttheconsequenceslater.Ihopethediscussionofthispolicy willbeahealthyone.Ourcommunityshouldbeabletoseriouslydiscusstheimpactofpovertyonourschools.
29
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Wednesday, December 26, 2012 10:40 AM Stephen Murley Board; council@iowa-city.org Re: Gregg Shoultz
Thanks, Steve. It would be good if you could deal with this quickly and visibly so that some stability and predictability can be brought to the manner in which the Diversity Policy and the RPS are presented to the public by district personnel. Regards, Ed
On Dec 26, 2012, at 9:40 AM, Stephen Murley wrote:

Stephen F. Murley
<image003.jpg>
Hi Steve, I am writing to ask you whether you think it is appropriate, ethical, and legal for Gregg Shoultz to use his ICCSD email account and the email addresses of the hundreds of families with children at Northwest Junior High to advance his personal political agenda (see below)?
30
If the board wished to send out a factual message about the diversity policy currently under consideration to families with students in the district, they could craft the language themselves and ask your office to send it out. It does not seem helpful or balanced to have a secondary principal send out a message with inflammatory phrases like "surfaced last week", "even more muddy" "current 8th graders in our district will be assigned to a school that they are not currently planning to attend", "extremely over-crowded before any new facility could be constructed", and "accept the consequences later". All citizens in our community are entitled to their opinions, but I do not think that school officials should be allowed to use their positions of influence and the confidential email lists that they have access to to amplify their voices -- especially if their voices are raised in opposition to equal treatment of all students in the district. I would appreciate it if you would communicate with Mr. Shoultz and all employees of the district and let them know that it is improper to use school email accounts, email address lists, and other public resources to express personal opinions in this manner. Regards, Ed
From:Shoultz.Gregg@iccsd.k12.ia.us Date:Wed,19Dec201215:22:260600 Subject:NWeNewsletter To: DearParents, Ihaveafewitemsofinteresttosendhomeforthewinterbreak: BoardHappeningsEquityPolicy IattendedameetingoftheICCSDschoolboardlastnightandlearnedalittlemoreaboutanewequitypolicy thatsurfacedlastweek.Ihaveattachedthepolicytothisemailforparentstoreview.Inlookingatthe elementarypartofthepolicyitseemslikeanhonestattempttoreigninsomeobviousdisparities.Itreminded meofwhattheICCSDadministrationwasabletodowhenBorlaugElementarywasbroughtonlinethisyear. PriortoBorlaugopening,Rooseveltwasahighpovertyschool(over50%)whileHornandWeberwere relativelylowpovertyschools.WithBorlaugnowonline,allthreeschoolsareinthe3033%freeandreduced lunchrangefortheirstudentpopulations.Thepolicygivesthesuperintendentfiveyearstobringthe elementaryschoolsincompliance.Thisisenoughtimetoplannewbuildingsandadditionswhichcouldgoa longwayinequalizingsomedisparity. ImlesscertainwhatthepolicywouldmeanforNorthwestandthetwohighschools.Inadditiontoequalizing thefreeandreducedlunchpopulationbetweenandamongtheschools,thepolicyalsohasstrictlanguage regardingbuildingutilization.Therearetimeswhenthepolicycallsforthejuniorhighstofallunderthesame categoryastheelementaryschools,andothertimesthepolicyreferstosecondaryschools.NW,SouthEast andNorthCentralaretypicallyconsideredsecondaryschools.Undermyreadingoftheproposedpolicy,there wouldhavetosomeshiftingofstudentsintheshorttermfromeitherSEorNCinorderforNWtobeutilized at90to95%ofcapacity.Ithinkitwouldbehelpfultounderstandhowthepolicywillbeenactedpriortoit becomingthelawoftheland.Thehighschoollevelseemsevenmoremuddy.Accordingthepolicy,the superintendentwouldhaveonlyoneyeartocomeintocompliancewitheitherthebuildingutilization provisionortheequityprovision.Thiswouldmostlikelymeanthatcurrent8thgradersinourdistrictwillbe assignedtoahighschoolthattheyarenotcurrentlyplanningtoattend.Mostlylikelythiswillmeanmore8th gradersfromNWorNCassignedtoCityHighnextyear.Itisalsolessclearhowanyothersecondaryschool
31
couldbebuiltwiththispolicy.TheutilizationrequirementswillmeanthatbothWestandCitywillhavetobe extremelyovercrowdedbeforeanynewfacilitycouldbeconstructed. Whenpassinganewboardpolicy,thenormalpracticeistopresentthepolicyatanopenmeetingthreetimes. Thereisapossibility,however,thatboardwillwaivethesecondreadinginordertopassthispolicyonJanuary 15.Ihopethisisnotthecaseasthisisanimportantpolicypropositionanditdeservesthoughtful consideration.Theimpactofthispolicyislikelytobedramatic,soitisimportantforourcommunitytoknow andunderstandthepolicynow,inordertoaccepttheconsequenceslater.Ihopethediscussionofthispolicy willbeahealthyone.Ourcommunityshouldbeabletoseriouslydiscusstheimpactofpovertyonourschools.
32
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Stephen Murley Wednesday, December 26, 2012 9:40 AM Edwin Stone Board; council@iowa-city.org RE: Gregg Shoultz

Stephen F. Murley
Hi Steve, I am writing to ask you whether you think it is appropriate, ethical, and legal for Gregg Shoultz to use his ICCSD email account and the email addresses of the hundreds of families with children at Northwest Junior High to advance his personal political agenda (see below)? If the board wished to send out a factual message about the diversity policy currently under consideration to families with students in the district, they could craft the language themselves and ask your office to send it out. It does not seem helpful or balanced to have a secondary principal send out a message with inflammatory phrases like "surfaced last week", "even more muddy" "current 8th graders in our district will be assigned to a school that they are not currently planning to attend", "extremely over-crowded before any new facility could be constructed", and "accept the consequences later". All citizens in our community are entitled to their opinions, but I do not think that school officials should be allowed to use their positions of influence and the confidential email lists that they have access to to amplify their voices -- especially if their voices are raised in opposition to equal treatment of all students in the district.
33
I would appreciate it if you would communicate with Mr. Shoultz and all employees of the district and let them know that it is improper to use school email accounts, email address lists, and other public resources to express personal opinions in this manner. Regards, Ed
From:Shoultz.Gregg@iccsd.k12.ia.us Date:Wed,19Dec201215:22:260600 Subject:NWeNewsletter To: DearParents, Ihaveafewitemsofinteresttosendhomeforthewinterbreak: BoardHappeningsEquityPolicy IattendedameetingoftheICCSDschoolboardlastnightandlearnedalittlemoreaboutanewequitypolicy thatsurfacedlastweek.Ihaveattachedthepolicytothisemailforparentstoreview.Inlookingatthe elementarypartofthepolicyitseemslikeanhonestattempttoreigninsomeobviousdisparities.Itreminded meofwhattheICCSDadministrationwasabletodowhenBorlaugElementarywasbroughtonlinethisyear. PriortoBorlaugopening,Rooseveltwasahighpovertyschool(over50%)whileHornandWeberwere relativelylowpovertyschools.WithBorlaugnowonline,allthreeschoolsareinthe3033%freeandreduced lunchrangefortheirstudentpopulations.Thepolicygivesthesuperintendentfiveyearstobringthe elementaryschoolsincompliance.Thisisenoughtimetoplannewbuildingsandadditionswhichcouldgoa longwayinequalizingsomedisparity. ImlesscertainwhatthepolicywouldmeanforNorthwestandthetwohighschools.Inadditiontoequalizing thefreeandreducedlunchpopulationbetweenandamongtheschools,thepolicyalsohasstrictlanguage regardingbuildingutilization.Therearetimeswhenthepolicycallsforthejuniorhighstofallunderthesame categoryastheelementaryschools,andothertimesthepolicyreferstosecondaryschools.NW,SouthEast andNorthCentralaretypicallyconsideredsecondaryschools.Undermyreadingoftheproposedpolicy,there wouldhavetosomeshiftingofstudentsintheshorttermfromeitherSEorNCinorderforNWtobeutilized at90to95%ofcapacity.Ithinkitwouldbehelpfultounderstandhowthepolicywillbeenactedpriortoit becomingthelawoftheland.Thehighschoollevelseemsevenmoremuddy.Accordingthepolicy,the superintendentwouldhaveonlyoneyeartocomeintocompliancewitheitherthebuildingutilization provisionortheequityprovision.Thiswouldmostlikelymeanthatcurrent8thgradersinourdistrictwillbe assignedtoahighschoolthattheyarenotcurrentlyplanningtoattend.Mostlylikelythiswillmeanmore8th gradersfromNWorNCassignedtoCityHighnextyear.Itisalsolessclearhowanyothersecondaryschool couldbebuiltwiththispolicy.TheutilizationrequirementswillmeanthatbothWestandCitywillhavetobe extremelyovercrowdedbeforeanynewfacilitycouldbeconstructed. Whenpassinganewboardpolicy,thenormalpracticeistopresentthepolicyatanopenmeetingthreetimes. Thereisapossibility,however,thatboardwillwaivethesecondreadinginordertopassthispolicyonJanuary 15.Ihopethisisnotthecaseasthisisanimportantpolicypropositionanditdeservesthoughtful consideration.Theimpactofthispolicyislikelytobedramatic,soitisimportantforourcommunitytoknow andunderstandthepolicynow,inordertoaccepttheconsequenceslater.Ihopethediscussionofthispolicy willbeahealthyone.Ourcommunityshouldbeabletoseriouslydiscusstheimpactofpovertyonourschools.
34
35
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 22, 2012 4:35 PM Stephen Murley Board; council@iowa-city.org Gregg Shoultz
Hi Steve, I am writing to ask you whether you think it is appropriate, ethical, and legal for Gregg Shoultz to use his ICCSD email account and the email addresses of the hundreds of families with children at Northwest Junior High to advance his personal political agenda (see below)? If the board wished to send out a factual message about the diversity policy currently under consideration to families with students in the district, they could craft the language themselves and ask your office to send it out. It does not seem helpful or balanced to have a secondary principal send out a message with inflammatory phrases like "surfaced last week", "even more muddy" "current 8th graders in our district will be assigned to a school that they are not currently planning to attend", "extremely over-crowded before any new facility could be constructed", and "accept the consequences later". All citizens in our community are entitled to their opinions, but I do not think that school officials should be allowed to use their positions of influence and the confidential email lists that they have access to to amplify their voices -- especially if their voices are raised in opposition to equal treatment of all students in the district. I would appreciate it if you would communicate with Mr. Shoultz and all employees of the district and let them know that it is improper to use school email accounts, email address lists, and other public resources to express personal opinions in this manner. Regards, Ed
From:Shoultz.Gregg@iccsd.k12.ia.us Date:Wed,19Dec201215:22:260600 Subject:NWeNewsletter To: DearParents, Ihaveafewitemsofinteresttosendhomeforthewinterbreak: BoardHappeningsEquityPolicy IattendedameetingoftheICCSDschoolboardlastnightandlearnedalittlemoreaboutanewequitypolicy thatsurfacedlastweek.Ihaveattachedthepolicytothisemailforparentstoreview.Inlookingatthe elementarypartofthepolicyitseemslikeanhonestattempttoreigninsomeobviousdisparities.Itreminded meofwhattheICCSDadministrationwasabletodowhenBorlaugElementarywasbroughtonlinethisyear. PriortoBorlaugopening,Rooseveltwasahighpovertyschool(over50%)whileHornandWeberwere relativelylowpovertyschools.WithBorlaugnowonline,allthreeschoolsareinthe3033%freeandreduced
36
lunchrangefortheirstudentpopulations.Thepolicygivesthesuperintendentfiveyearstobringthe elementaryschoolsincompliance.Thisisenoughtimetoplannewbuildingsandadditionswhichcouldgoa longwayinequalizingsomedisparity. ImlesscertainwhatthepolicywouldmeanforNorthwestandthetwohighschools.Inadditiontoequalizing thefreeandreducedlunchpopulationbetweenandamongtheschools,thepolicyalsohasstrictlanguage regardingbuildingutilization.Therearetimeswhenthepolicycallsforthejuniorhighstofallunderthesame categoryastheelementaryschools,andothertimesthepolicyreferstosecondaryschools.NW,SouthEast andNorthCentralaretypicallyconsideredsecondaryschools.Undermyreadingoftheproposedpolicy,there wouldhavetosomeshiftingofstudentsintheshorttermfromeitherSEorNCinorderforNWtobeutilized at90to95%ofcapacity.Ithinkitwouldbehelpfultounderstandhowthepolicywillbeenactedpriortoit becomingthelawoftheland.Thehighschoollevelseemsevenmoremuddy.Accordingthepolicy,the superintendentwouldhaveonlyoneyeartocomeintocompliancewitheitherthebuildingutilization provisionortheequityprovision.Thiswouldmostlikelymeanthatcurrent8thgradersinourdistrictwillbe assignedtoahighschoolthattheyarenotcurrentlyplanningtoattend.Mostlylikelythiswillmeanmore8th gradersfromNWorNCassignedtoCityHighnextyear.Itisalsolessclearhowanyothersecondaryschool couldbebuiltwiththispolicy.TheutilizationrequirementswillmeanthatbothWestandCitywillhavetobe extremelyovercrowdedbeforeanynewfacilitycouldbeconstructed. Whenpassinganewboardpolicy,thenormalpracticeistopresentthepolicyatanopenmeetingthreetimes. Thereisapossibility,however,thatboardwillwaivethesecondreadinginordertopassthispolicyonJanuary 15.Ihopethisisnotthecaseasthisisanimportantpolicypropositionanditdeservesthoughtful consideration.Theimpactofthispolicyislikelytobedramatic,soitisimportantforourcommunitytoknow andunderstandthepolicynow,inordertoaccepttheconsequenceslater.Ihopethediscussionofthispolicy willbeahealthyone.Ourcommunityshouldbeabletoseriouslydiscusstheimpactofpovertyonourschools.
37
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: John Bacon Monday, December 17, 2012 7:30 AM Edwin Stone Re: Letter for naming
Excellent.Thanks,Ed!John On12/16/122:49PM,"EdwinStone"<stone.edwin@gmail.com>wrote: HiJohn, Iputthefollowingletteronletterheadinthemailtoyoutoday. Regards, Ed Dear Mr. Bacon, I am writing to convey my very enthusiastic support for naming the new performing arts center after Candace Wiebener. Her four decades of outstanding instruction of Iowa City students alone would merit this honor, but Ms. Wiebener has contributed much, much more than that to our community. Ms. Wiebener is a living symbol of the uncompromising pursuit of excellence, a trait that is rare in any sphere of human endeavor but is extremely unusual in the context of public education. Throughout her career, she made students believe in themselves to the degree that they were transformed from average musicians living in a small university town to Grammy Award winners. One of my neighbors played football in the NFL for a number of years but was also Ms. Wiebeners student. He told me that Candy Wiebener was able to motivate people to perform more effectively than any coach he ever had in his professional career. One of my fondest memories is that of watching my sons class perform in the Luther Platz in Worms, Germany during his senior year. The plaza was packed with hundreds of appreciative people who heard each piece announced in flawless German by one of Nicks classmates. And the performances of the pieces themselves were worthy of the symphony orchestra of a large American city. To think that these musicians were students in a public high school! What a wonderful reflection on our country. I am so, so pleased that my son had the chance to be part of such a thing. Candace Wiebener is one of the most gifted educators who has ever taught public school in our country and it would be a fitting and well-deserved honor to name the new performing arts building for her. OnDec7,2012,at4:19PM,JohnBaconwrote:
38
Ed, IknowyouareaverybusymanandyouhavedoneSOmuchforourschools.Ihatetoaskyouforanotherfavor,butdo youthinkyoucouldwritealetterofsupporttonamethenewfineartswingafterCandyWiebener?Theletterdoesnot havetobesuperlong,asIthinkthiswillbeaslamdunk.Ijusthavebeeninstructedtogatherlettersfromseveral parentsandfacultymembers.I'dneeditbymidJanuary.Thanks!JohnBacon
39
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Sunday, December 16, 2012 3:55 PM Edwin Stone RE: Word change
Thanks, Ed From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2012 4:14 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Word change
Hi Sarah, The following is a paragraph from the equity policy. I believe the word in red is an error and should be removed. Thanks, Ed
Fail to achieve at least one diversity or capacity or utilization goal at the 9-12 level within one year of adoption of this policy in the special case that differences in both diversity and capacity utilization exceed 10 percentage points between two comprehensive 9-12 schools in the district.
40
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Sunday, December 16, 2012 2:50 PM John Bacon Re: Letter for naming
Hi John, I put the following letter on letterhead in the mail to you today. Regards, Ed Dear Mr. Bacon, I am writing to convey my very enthusiastic support for naming the new performing arts center after Candace Wiebener. Her four decades of outstanding instruction of Iowa City students alone would merit this honor, but Ms. Wiebener has contributed much, much more than that to our community. Ms. Wiebener is a living symbol of the uncompromising pursuit of excellence, a trait that is rare any sphere of human endeavor but is extremely unusual in the context of public education. Throughout her career, she made students believe in themselves to the degree that they were transformed from average musicians living in a small university town to Grammy Award winner One of my neighbors played football in the NFL for a number of years but was also Ms. Wiebeners student. He told me that Candy Wiebener was able to motivate people to perform more effectively than any coach he ever had in his professional career. One of my fondest memories is that of watching my sons class perform in the Luther Platz in Worms, Germany during his senior year. The plaza was packed with hundreds of appreciative people who heard each piece announced in flawless German by one of Nicks classmates. An the performances of the pieces themselves were worthy of the symphony orchestra of a large American city. To think that these musicians were students in a public high school! What a wonderful reflection on our country. I am so, so pleased that my son had the chance to be par of such a thing. Candace Wiebener is one of the most gifted educators who has ever taught public school in ou country and it would be a fitting and well-deserved honor to name the new performing arts building for her.
On Dec 7, 2012, at 4:19 PM, John Bacon wrote:
Ed,
41
I know you are a very busy man and you have done SO much for our schools. I hate to ask you for another favor, but do you think you could write a letter of support to name the new fine arts wing after Candy Wiebener? The letter does not have to be super long, as I think this will be a slam dunk. I just have been instructed to gather letters from several parents and faculty members. I'd need it by mid-January. Thanks! --John Bacon
42
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 15, 2012 4:15 PM Sarah Swisher Word change
Hi Sarah, The following is a paragraph from the equity policy. I believe the word in red is an error and should be removed. Thanks, Ed
Fail to achieve at least one diversity or capacity or utilization goal at the 9-12 level within one year of adoption of this policy in the special case that differences in both diversity and capacity utilization exceed 10 percentage points between two comprehensive 9-12 schools in the district.
43
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Sarah Richardson <smr@barkerapartments.com> Wednesday, December 12, 2012 9:25 PM Sarah Swisher Edwin Stone Re: Policy with associated Superintendent Limitations
Wow, Sarah. This is really, really well done from start to finish. Simple, elegant, powerful. I am really impressed. It has the potential to truly have an impact on the future of our children by assuring equity for everyone. Thank you so very much for your great thinking and writing and your commitment to this important cause. The invitation to come enjoy wine and fudge is open. Come on by if you can. You will sleep well tonight knowing you have done such a great job. Again, thank you very much, Sarah On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote: Two versions attached. The one ending in "a" is a clean copy without visible edits. The one ending in "compare" shows the few changes that I suggested in color.
Bottom line?
bee YOOO tee full

Feel free to call me again tonight if I can be of further help. Regards, Ed On Dec 12, 2012, at 8:09 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote:
give a call, one of you. ________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com]

44
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 10:04 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Re: Suggestions for the equity document itself Sarah, My suggestions attached. Ed
<PoliyDraftThree12.12.12.docx>
45
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Wednesday, December 12, 2012 8:54 PM Sarah Swisher smr@barkerapartments.com Re: Policy with associated Superintendent Limitations PoliyDraftThree12.12.12a.docx; 12.12.12.compare.docx
Two versions attached. The one ending in "a" is a clean copy without visible edits. The one ending in "compare" shows the few changes that I suggested in color.
Bottom line?
bee YOOO tee full

Feel free to call me again tonight if I can be of further help. Regards, Ed On Dec 12, 2012, at 8:09 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote:
give a call, one of you. ________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 10:04 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Re: Suggestions for the equity document itself Sarah, My suggestions attached. Ed
<PoliyDraftThree12.12.12.docx>
46
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Sarah M. Richardson <smr@barkerapartments.com> Wednesday, December 12, 2012 8:33 PM Sarah Swisher Edwin Stone Re: Policy with associated Superintendent Limitations
Sarah, Good job! I am buried in kid duty so cannot comment in detail right now, but after quick look they look good. I am sure Ed will be able to comment more. I have fresh homemade fudge and good red wine, Sarah if you want to walk over sometime between 9:30 and 10. Ed you certainly are most welcome too. Sarah R. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 12, 2012, at 8:09 PM, Sarah Swisher <Sarah.Swisher@iccsd.k12.ia.us> wrote: > give a call, one of you. > > ________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 10:04 PM > To: Sarah Swisher > Subject: Re: Suggestions for the equity document itself > > Sarah, > > My suggestions attached. > > Ed > > > <PoliyDraftThree12.12.12.docx>
47
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Sarah Swisher Wednesday, December 12, 2012 8:09 PM Edwin Stone smr@barkerapartments.com Policy with associated Superintendent Limitations PoliyDraftThree12.12.12.docx
give a call, one of you. From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 10:04 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Re: Suggestions for the equity document itself Sarah, My suggestions attached. Ed
48
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Tuesday, December 11, 2012 10:05 PM Sarah Swisher Re: Suggestions for the equity document itself PoliyDraftThree12.11.12.3b.docx
Sarah, My suggestions attached. Ed
49
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Sarah Swisher Tuesday, December 11, 2012 9:34 PM Edwin Stone RE: Suggestions for the equity document itself PoliyDraftThree12.11.12.3.docx
????? Highlighted changes From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 8:42 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Re: Suggestions for the equity document itself Sarah, I have attached the current version as a clean copy with tracked changes turned off. My problems with this version are that it allows insular gerrymandering and it permits one school to be 130% full while another at that grade level is 70% full. You couldn't build a new school while the underfilled one was at 70% but according to this policy you could leave one school much more filled than another until you wanted to build a new school. Why not address this type of disparity in the document? Ed
On Dec 11, 2012, at 4:17 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reply...thanks for the help and adopted most changes in document but do NOT want to use this editing tool. Tool complicated and too many tracking entities. Thanks though. Have NO idea how to get out of edit mode so will send you newest version and ask YOU to get it out if edit mode, if mode shows up. We WILL discuss all of your suggestions in committee, especially if not included here. Sarah ________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:18 AM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Suggestions for the equity document itself Hi Sarah,
50
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Thanks for sharing the equity drafts with me. Attached are some suggestions for the equity document itself in a "tracked changes" format. I would be happy to discuss these suggestions with you if you have any questions about them. Regards, Ed
<PoliyDraftThree12.11.docx>
51
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Tuesday, December 11, 2012 9:25 PM Edwin Stone RE: Suggestions for the equity document itself
OK, I get that. I might have misread your document. "Secondary facilities must be within 10 percentage points of filled capacity" ???? Sarah From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2012 8:42 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Re: Suggestions for the equity document itself Sarah, I have attached the current version as a clean copy with tracked changes turned off. My problems with this version are that it allows insular gerrymandering and it permits one school to be 130% full while another at that grade level is 70% full. You couldn't build a new school while the underfilled one was at 70% but according to this policy you could leave one school much more filled than another until you wanted to build a new school. Why not address this type of disparity in the document? Ed
On Dec 11, 2012, at 4:17 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reply...thanks for the help and adopted most changes in document but do NOT want to use this editing tool. Tool complicated and too many tracking entities. Thanks though. Have NO idea how to get out of edit mode so will send you newest version and ask YOU to get it out if edit mode, if mode shows up. We WILL discuss all of your suggestions in committee, especially if not included here. Sarah ________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:18 AM To: Sarah Swisher
52
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Subject: Suggestions for the equity document itself Hi Sarah, Thanks for sharing the equity drafts with me. Attached are some suggestions for the equity document itself in a "tracked changes" format. I would be happy to discuss these suggestions with you if you have any questions about them. Regards, Ed
<PoliyDraftThree12.11.docx>
53
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Tuesday, December 11, 2012 8:47 PM Sarah Swisher Re: Education
Thanks, Sarah. On Dec 11, 2012, at 11:09 AM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > What a lovely essay and obviously a girl with heart and intelligent > vision. You must be proud of her. Did she send it to the PC? > > ________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2012 9:51 PM > To: Sarah Swisher > Subject: Education > > >
54
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Tuesday, December 11, 2012 8:42 PM Sarah Swisher Re: Suggestions for the equity document itself PoliyDraftThree12.11.docx
Sarah, I have attached the current version as a clean copy with tracked changes turned off. My problems with this version are that it allows insular gerrymandering and it permits one school to be 130% full while another at that grade level is 70% full. You couldn't build a new school while the underfilled one was at 70% but according to this policy you could leave one school much more filled than another until you wanted to build a new school. Why not address this type of disparity in the document? Ed
On Dec 11, 2012, at 4:17 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > Reply...thanks for the help and adopted most changes in document but > do NOT want to use this editing tool. Tool complicated and too many > tracking entities. Thanks though. Have NO idea how to get out of > edit mode so will send you newest version and ask YOU to get it out > if edit mode, if mode shows up. We WILL discuss all of your > suggestions in committee, especially if not included here. > > Sarah > > ________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:18 AM > To: Sarah Swisher > Subject: Suggestions for the equity document itself > > Hi Sarah, > > Thanks for sharing the equity drafts with me. > > Attached are some suggestions for the equity document itself in a > "tracked changes" format. > > I would be happy to discuss these suggestions with you if you have any > questions about them. > > Regards, > > Ed
55
> > > > > <PoliyDraftThree12.11.docx>
56
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Sarah Swisher Tuesday, December 11, 2012 4:18 PM Edwin Stone RE: Suggestions for the equity document itself PoliyDraftThree12.11.docx
Reply...thanks for the help and adopted most changes in document but do NOT want to use this editing tool. Tool complicated and too many tracking entities. Thanks though. Have NO idea how to get out of edit mode so will send you newest version and ask YOU to get it out if edit mode, if mode shows up. We WILL discuss all of your suggestions in committee, especially if not included here. Sarah From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:18 AM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Suggestions for the equity document itself Hi Sarah, Thanks for sharing the equity drafts with me. Attached are some suggestions for the equity document itself in a "tracked changes" format. I would be happy to discuss these suggestions with you if you have any questions about them. Regards, Ed
57
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Tuesday, December 11, 2012 11:09 AM Edwin Stone RE: Education
What a lovely essay and obviously a girl with heart and intelligent vision. You must be proud of her. Did she send it to the PC? From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2012 9:51 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Education
58
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Tuesday, December 11, 2012 11:01 AM Edwin Stone RE: Question
We are working together. ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 3:02 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Re: Question Is Jeff drafting something? Ed
On Dec 10, 2012, at 1:33 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > I guess that is a good question for you. Yes Three Readings, and > since Steve is(may) be leaving I think we need a first draft of > limitations language by Thursday to include in the first reading on > Tuesday next. He will be invited to review and participate in that > process but has no authority. > > Sarah > > ________________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:20 AM > To: Sarah Swisher > Subject: Question > > Hi Sarah, > > When does the superintendent limitation language need to be in its > final form? > > Will that language need three readings, too? > > Ed
59
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Monday, December 10, 2012 3:03 PM Sarah Swisher Re: Question
Is Jeff drafting something? Ed
On Dec 10, 2012, at 1:33 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > I guess that is a good question for you. Yes Three Readings, and > since Steve is(may) be leaving I think we need a first draft of > limitations language by Thursday to include in the first reading on > Tuesday next. He will be invited to review and participate in that > process but has no authority. > > Sarah > > ________________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:20 AM > To: Sarah Swisher > Subject: Question > > Hi Sarah, > > When does the superintendent limitation language need to be in its > final form? > > Will that language need three readings, too? > > Ed
60
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Monday, December 10, 2012 1:33 PM Edwin Stone RE: Question
I guess that is a good question for you. Yes Three Readings, and since Steve is(may) be leaving I think we need a first draft of limitations language by Thursday to include in the first reading on Tuesday next. He will be invited to review and participate in that process but has no authority. Sarah ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:20 AM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Question Hi Sarah, When does the superintendent limitation language need to be in its final form? Will that language need three readings, too? Ed
61
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Monday, December 10, 2012 11:54 AM Sarah Swisher Additional suggestions for the equity document itself Second draft diversity 11.18.12b.docx
Hi Sarah, Thanks for sharing the equity drafts with me. Attached are some suggestions for the equity document itself in a "tracked changes" format. I have added the insular gerrymandering language to this version. I would be happy to discuss these suggestions with you if you have any questions about them. Regards, Ed
62
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Monday, December 10, 2012 11:20 AM Sarah Swisher Question
Hi Sarah, When does the superintendent limitation language need to be in its final form? Will that language need three readings, too? Ed
63
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Monday, December 10, 2012 11:19 AM Sarah Swisher Suggestions for the equity document itself Second draft diversity 11.18.12a.docx
Hi Sarah, Thanks for sharing the equity drafts with me. Attached are some suggestions for the equity document itself in a "tracked changes" format. I would be happy to discuss these suggestions with you if you have any questions about them. Regards, Ed
64
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Monday, December 10, 2012 10:26 AM Sarah Swisher Suggestions for the preamble Preamble Draft 1.docx
Hi Sarah, Thanks for sharing the equity drafts with me. Attached are some suggestions for the preamble document in a "tracked changes" format. The main section that needs some work to fit in to the rest of the piece is marked in yellow. Feel free to use or disregard any of these comments. Regards, Ed
65
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Sunday, December 09, 2012 9:52 PM Sarah Swisher Education philosophy of education FINAL.docx
66
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Sunday, December 09, 2012 3:12 PM Jeff McGinness Insular Gerrymandering
Hi Jeff, Thanks very much for taking the time to have lunch with me today. I think that the equity statement that you and your fellow board members are working on would be a good vehicle for doing away with insular gerrymandering (IG) in the ICCSD. IG is the term I use to refer to the practice of creating small elementary attendance areas completely surrounded by the attendance areas of one or more other elementary schools. There are 3 of these in the ICCSD now: Lake Ridge mobile home park (1 on the attached map) the Pheasant Ridge Apartments (2) and a zone in the Penn enrollment area (3). I believe that the creation and/or maintenance of such zones should only be allowed if two conditions are met: 1) the students in the IG zone will attend a school with a lower FRL than the school they would have attended without IG; and, 2) the school(s) the IG students will attend (elementary, junior high and senior high) will all move closer to the district FRL average (or stay the same) than they would be without the IG zone. With these rules, the Lake Ridge zone would not be allowed because it moves kids to a less affluent elementary than they would otherwise attend (Twain instead of Weber) AND it moves the FRL of SEJH and City High further from the district average. The Pheasant Ridge zone would not be allowed because it moves kids to a less affluent elementary than they would otherwise attend (Weber instead of either Horn of Borlaug). Zone 3 in the Penn area would be allowed because it moves kids to a school with a lower FRL (Garner instead of Penn), takes Garner closer to the district average, and leaves the makeup of the junior high and senior high unchanged. Thanks for considering this. Regards, Ed
67
68
69
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 08, 2012 6:36 PM Jeff McGinness Re: ICCSD
Great. Mondo s tomato pie at noon. Ed Sent from my iPhone On Dec 8, 2012, at 6:30 PM, Jeff McGinness <Jeff.McGinness@iccsd.k12.ia.us> wrote: > That works. See you tomorrow at noon? > > Jeffrey K. McGinness > > > On Dec 8, 2012, at 5:04 PM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Shall we have lunch at Mondo's again? >> >> Ed >> >> >> On Dec 8, 2012, at 4:42 PM, Jeff McGinness wrote: >> >>> I am open as well. Pick a time and location. >>> >>> Jeffrey K. McGinness >>> >>> >>> On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:32 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Tomorrow would be better for me. >>>> >>>> My schedule tomorrow is flexible. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Ed >>>> >>>> >>>> On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:29 AM, Jeff McGinness wrote: >>>> >>>>> Ed >>>>> >>>>> Sorry for not getting back to you sooner but yes. What is your >>>>> schedule like late afternoon today or tomorrow? >>>>> >>>>> Jeffrey K. McGinness
70
>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:21 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Would you like to get together this weekend? >>>>>> >>>>>> Ed >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Dec 6, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Jeff McGinness wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Ed >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would like to get together again over coffee or otherwise to >>>>>>> discuss some of the stuff we have going to be sure I am getting >>>>>>> a balanced perspective. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let me know if/when you have time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jeffrey K. McGinness >>
71
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Jeff McGinness Saturday, December 08, 2012 6:31 PM Edwin Stone Re: ICCSD
That works. See you tomorrow at noon? Jeffrey K. McGinness
On Dec 8, 2012, at 5:04 PM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote: > Shall we have lunch at Mondo's again? > > Ed > > > On Dec 8, 2012, at 4:42 PM, Jeff McGinness wrote: > >> I am open as well. Pick a time and location. >> >> Jeffrey K. McGinness >> >> >> On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:32 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Tomorrow would be better for me. >>> >>> My schedule tomorrow is flexible. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Ed >>> >>> >>> On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:29 AM, Jeff McGinness wrote: >>> >>>> Ed >>>> >>>> Sorry for not getting back to you sooner but yes. What is your >>>> schedule like late afternoon today or tomorrow? >>>> >>>> Jeffrey K. McGinness >>>> >>>> >>>> On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:21 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Would you like to get together this weekend? >>>>>
72
>>>>> Ed >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Dec 6, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Jeff McGinness wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Ed >>>>>> >>>>>> I would like to get together again over coffee or otherwise to >>>>>> discuss some of the stuff we have going to be sure I am getting a >>>>>> balanced perspective. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let me know if/when you have time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jeffrey K. McGinness >
73
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 08, 2012 5:05 PM Jeff McGinness Re: ICCSD
Shall we have lunch at Mondo's again? Ed
On Dec 8, 2012, at 4:42 PM, Jeff McGinness wrote: > I am open as well. Pick a time and location. > > Jeffrey K. McGinness > > > On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:32 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Tomorrow would be better for me. >> >> My schedule tomorrow is flexible. >> >> Regards, >> >> Ed >> >> >> On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:29 AM, Jeff McGinness wrote: >> >>> Ed >>> >>> Sorry for not getting back to you sooner but yes. What is your >>> schedule like late afternoon today or tomorrow? >>> >>> Jeffrey K. McGinness >>> >>> >>> On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:21 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Would you like to get together this weekend? >>>> >>>> Ed >>>> >>>> >>>> On Dec 6, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Jeff McGinness wrote: >>>> >>>>> Ed >>>>>
74
>>>>> I would like to get together again over coffee or otherwise to >>>>> discuss some of the stuff we have going to be sure I am getting a >>>>> balanced perspective. >>>>> >>>>> Let me know if/when you have time. >>>>> >>>>> Jeffrey K. McGinness >>
75
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Jeff McGinness Saturday, December 08, 2012 4:43 PM Edwin Stone Re: ICCSD
I am open as well. Pick a time and location. Jeffrey K. McGinness
On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:32 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote: > Tomorrow would be better for me. > > My schedule tomorrow is flexible. > > Regards, > > Ed > > > On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:29 AM, Jeff McGinness wrote: > >> Ed >> >> Sorry for not getting back to you sooner but yes. What is your >> schedule like late afternoon today or tomorrow? >> >> Jeffrey K. McGinness >> >> >> On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:21 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Would you like to get together this weekend? >>> >>> Ed >>> >>> >>> On Dec 6, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Jeff McGinness wrote: >>> >>>> Ed >>>> >>>> I would like to get together again over coffee or otherwise to >>>> discuss some of the stuff we have going to be sure I am getting a >>>> balanced perspective. >>>> >>>> Let me know if/when you have time. >>>> >>>> Jeffrey K. McGinness >
76
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 08, 2012 4:35 PM Sarah Swisher Re: How to kill the RPS
Great. When and where would you like to do do? Regards, Ed
On Dec 8, 2012, at 3:30 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > Yeah, we better. Especially now. > > ________________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2012 11:21 AM > To: Sarah Swisher > Subject: Re: How to kill the RPS > > Would you like to meet? > > Ed > > > On Dec 5, 2012, at 2:34 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > >> OK, so time for a meeting with you sir. Below please find what are >> just a few highlights of my political career. You are a scientist >> and I am a political and policy professional. We WILL complete the >> moral, meaningful and equitable policy, governance and administrative >> effort that our children need and deserve. We WILL also win the >> election hoping that you personally and/or collectively recognize the >> greater good to which this board is committed. In a dozen years of >> political work I have never held votes hostage. >> Voting is a personal choice and threatening to secede before the >> board's policy work is complete very demoralizing. This email is >> adressed only to you and has not been copied or forwarded. >> >> Sarah >> See Below: >> >> Volunteer Activities/ Appointments >> 1985---1995 RN Volunteer Johnson County WIC Clinic >> 2000---2005 Board of Directors, Johnson County United >> Way >> 2001 Legislative Interim Committee, >> Needle Stick Prevention >> 2002---2007 6th Judicial District Nominating Commission
77
>> 2002---2003 Co-Chair ICCSD Yes for Kids Bond >> Referendum, at the time the largest bond referendum in the history >> of state. Required super-majority. 72% yes vote >> 2003 Governor Vilsack Task Force on Nursing >> 2003 Appointed Honorary Colonel Iowa >> National Guard >> 2003 Harkin Nurse Advisory Council >> 20042006 Board of Directors, Iowa Citizen Action >> Network >> 2007 Legislative Commission on Affordable >> Health Care (Sub-committee chair, workforce issues) >> 2008 Culver/Judge Task Force on Nursing >> (Sub-committee chair, wages) >> 2009---Present Director, ICCSD Board of Education >> 2010 Member Johnson County Council of >> Government >> 2007---Present Member, First Presbyterian Church, Iowa City >> 2000---2004 Iowa Comprehensive Cancer Consortium >> 2006---2008 Co-Chair Iowa Partnership to Fight >> Chronic Disease >> 2009---Present Steering Committee member Iowa City Sanctuary City >> Committee Elected Public Office 2009---Present Director, ICCSD Board >> of Education Union Offices >> 1998 Organizing Committee, SEIU UIHC successful campaign >> 1999 Local 199 Steering Committee >> 1999---2010 Local 199 Executive Board >> 19992010 Local 199 COPE Chair >> 2000---2003 President SEIU UIHC Chapter >> 2000---2006 Vice President, Iowa Federation of Labor >> 2006---2010 Secretary, Iowa Change to Win >> Democratic Party Offices >> 1980--- 2008 State Convention Delegate >> 1984 John Culver Scholarship, 1st Place >> 1998--- 2002 Secretary Johnson County Democratic Party >> 2002--- 2004 1st Vice Chair Johnson County Democratic Party >> 2002 Co-Chair Johnson County for Vilsack >> 2002 Co-Chair Nurses for Harkin (State>> wide) >> 2004---2006 Chair, Johnson County Democratic Party >> 2006 Blouin Kitchen Cabnet, Johnson >> County Co-Chair >> 2004---2006 2nd Vice Chair Iowa Democratic Party >> 2006---2008 1st Vice Chair Iowa Democratic Party >> 2006---2009 Member, Democratic National Committee >> 2007---2009 Rules and By-laws Committee Member, DNC >> 2008 Super Delegate National Democratic >> Party Convention >> 2007---2008 Member DNC Rural Caucus >> 2004---2008 Campaign director Iowa House senate Races >> winning majority in Iowa House and a total of 9 out of 12 races >> coordinated, 3 of them dark horses. >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 8:14 AM
78
>> To: Stephen Murley >> Cc: Board; council@iowa-city.org >> Subject: How to kill the RPS >> >> Hi Steve, >> >> I don't know what tea leaves you are consulting but the RPS isn't >> doing so well in my neighborhood right now. >> >> The ICCSD has an absolutely abysmal track record over the past 10 >> years for managing disparity of enrollment, FRL or physical >> facilities and few people south of I-80 think that $100M -- by itself >> -- is going to change that. >> >> Many people, including myself, WANT to believe that things will >> change and DO believe in the intent and the integrity of the subset >> of board members who have consistently taken meaningful actions to >> make things better. However, for people to believe it enough to vote >> for the extremely broad RPS, they will need to see an equity policy >> enacted. One with teeth: one that will move high school kids NOW, >> build east side elementary schools NOW and refurbish older buildings >> NOW. One that will ensure that if a new high school is built, it >> will be done in a way that will not worsen curricular disparities and >> increase socioeconomic and racial segregation. >> >> However, if you are one of the many people who want the RPS vote to >> fail in February, here are three things you can do to make SURE that >> it does. >> >> 1) Keep making public statements that show that you are totally >> opposed to redistricting at the high school level and that the only >> solution you can imagine for the overcrowding at West High is the >> construction of a third high school (with an even lower FRL) north of >> I-80 as soon as physically possible. You might for example give the >> Press Citizen a quote like: "We would much rather be able to slide >> [the new high school] forward than have to push it back". Every >> quote like this is a 45 caliber slug to the chest of the RPS. It >> might survive with urgent surgery but I doubt it. >> >> 2) Buy land for a third high school before the RPS vote. This way >> everyone will KNOW that the fix is in and all this equity talk is >> just talk. This action would not be survivable. >> >> 3) Fail to pass a meaningful equity policy -- with teeth -- before >> January 10. You can accomplish this nail in the RPS coffin by having >> board members who favor segregation use the word "busing" a lot in >> committee meetings and board meetings. This is a great inflammatory >> word that has been used to accelerate segregation of communities for >> more than 50 years. They can also object to things here and there on >> procedural grounds. You can have Ann Feldmann pipe up from time to >> time and ask why 10% points of FRL is so important. Why not 15%? >> 20%? Things like that. Just slow the process down, water it down, >> make it nothing. Make sure that the community understands that the >> current ICCSD administration stands for "neighborhood schools" full >> of affluent folks in the north part of the ICCSD and "neighborhood >> schools" with aging, un-air-conditioned, roach infested buildings
79
>> full of non-affluent folks in the south. >> >> You are well on your way to killing the RPS. Just keep doing the >> things you are doing and you will succeed. >> >> Ed
80
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Saturday, December 08, 2012 3:30 PM Edwin Stone RE: How to kill the RPS
Yeah, we better. Especially now. ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2012 11:21 AM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Re: How to kill the RPS Would you like to meet? Ed
On Dec 5, 2012, at 2:34 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > OK, so time for a meeting with you sir. Below please find what are > just a few highlights of my political career. You are a scientist and > I am a political and policy professional. We WILL complete the moral, > meaningful and equitable policy, governance and administrative effort > that our children need and deserve. We WILL also win the election > hoping that you personally and/or collectively recognize the greater > good to which this board is committed. In a dozen years of political > work I have never held votes hostage. > Voting is a personal choice and threatening to secede before the > board's policy work is complete very demoralizing. This email is > adressed only to you and has not been copied or forwarded. > > Sarah > See Below: > > Volunteer Activities/ Appointments > 1985---1995 RN Volunteer Johnson County WIC Clinic > 2000---2005 Board of Directors, Johnson County United > Way > 2001 Legislative Interim Committee, > Needle Stick Prevention > 2002---2007 6th Judicial District Nominating Commission > 2002---2003 Co-Chair ICCSD Yes for Kids Bond > Referendum, at the time the largest bond referendum in the history > of state. Required super-majority. 72% yes vote > 2003 Governor Vilsack Task Force on Nursing > 2003 Appointed Honorary Colonel Iowa > National Guard > 2003 Harkin Nurse Advisory Council > 20042006 Board of Directors, Iowa Citizen Action > Network
81
> 2007 Legislative Commission on Affordable > Health Care (Sub-committee chair, workforce issues) > 2008 Culver/Judge Task Force on Nursing > (Sub-committee chair, wages) > 2009---Present Director, ICCSD Board of Education > 2010 Member Johnson County Council of > Government > 2007---Present Member, First Presbyterian Church, Iowa City > 2000---2004 Iowa Comprehensive Cancer Consortium > 2006---2008 Co-Chair Iowa Partnership to Fight > Chronic Disease > 2009---Present Steering Committee member Iowa City Sanctuary City > Committee Elected Public Office 2009---Present Director, ICCSD Board > of Education Union Offices > 1998 Organizing Committee, SEIU UIHC successful campaign > 1999 Local 199 Steering Committee > 1999---2010 Local 199 Executive Board > 19992010 Local 199 COPE Chair > 2000---2003 President SEIU UIHC Chapter > 2000---2006 Vice President, Iowa Federation of Labor > 2006---2010 Secretary, Iowa Change to Win > Democratic Party Offices > 1980--- 2008 State Convention Delegate > 1984 John Culver Scholarship, 1st Place > 1998--- 2002 Secretary Johnson County Democratic Party > 2002--- 2004 1st Vice Chair Johnson County Democratic Party > 2002 Co-Chair Johnson County for Vilsack > 2002 Co-Chair Nurses for Harkin (State> wide) > 2004---2006 Chair, Johnson County Democratic Party > 2006 Blouin Kitchen Cabnet, Johnson > County Co-Chair > 2004---2006 2nd Vice Chair Iowa Democratic Party > 2006---2008 1st Vice Chair Iowa Democratic Party > 2006---2009 Member, Democratic National Committee > 2007---2009 Rules and By-laws Committee Member, DNC > 2008 Super Delegate National Democratic > Party Convention > 2007---2008 Member DNC Rural Caucus > 2004---2008 Campaign director Iowa House senate Races > winning majority in Iowa House and a total of 9 out of 12 races > coordinated, 3 of them dark horses. > > > ________________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 8:14 AM > To: Stephen Murley > Cc: Board; council@iowa-city.org > Subject: How to kill the RPS > > Hi Steve, > > I don't know what tea leaves you are consulting but the RPS isn't > doing so well in my neighborhood right now. >
82
> The ICCSD has an absolutely abysmal track record over the past 10 > years for managing disparity of enrollment, FRL or physical facilities > and few people south of I-80 think that $100M -- by itself -- is going > to change that. > > Many people, including myself, WANT to believe that things will > change and DO believe in the intent and the integrity of the subset of > board members who have consistently taken meaningful actions to make > things better. However, for people to believe it enough to vote for > the extremely broad RPS, they will need to see an equity policy > enacted. One with teeth: one that will move high school kids NOW, > build east side elementary schools NOW and refurbish older buildings > NOW. One that will ensure that if a new high school is built, it will > be done in a way that will not worsen curricular disparities and > increase socioeconomic and racial segregation. > > However, if you are one of the many people who want the RPS vote to > fail in February, here are three things you can do to make SURE that > it does. > > 1) Keep making public statements that show that you are totally > opposed to redistricting at the high school level and that the only > solution you can imagine for the overcrowding at West High is the > construction of a third high school (with an even lower FRL) north of > I-80 as soon as physically possible. You might for example give the > Press Citizen a quote like: "We would much rather be able to slide > [the new high school] forward than have to push it back". Every quote > like this is a 45 caliber slug to the chest of the RPS. It might > survive with urgent surgery but I doubt it. > > 2) Buy land for a third high school before the RPS vote. This way > everyone will KNOW that the fix is in and all this equity talk is just > talk. This action would not be survivable. > > 3) Fail to pass a meaningful equity policy -- with teeth -- before > January 10. You can accomplish this nail in the RPS coffin by having > board members who favor segregation use the word "busing" a lot in > committee meetings and board meetings. This is a great inflammatory > word that has been used to accelerate segregation of communities for > more than 50 years. They can also object to things here and there on > procedural grounds. You can have Ann Feldmann pipe up from time to > time and ask why 10% points of FRL is so important. Why not 15%? > 20%? Things like that. Just slow the process down, water it down, > make it nothing. Make sure that the community understands that the > current ICCSD administration stands for "neighborhood schools" full of > affluent folks in the north part of the ICCSD and "neighborhood > schools" with aging, un-air-conditioned, roach infested buildings full > of non-affluent folks in the south. > > You are well on your way to killing the RPS. Just keep doing the > things you are doing and you will succeed. > > Ed
83
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 08, 2012 11:33 AM Jeff McGinness Re: ICCSD
Tomorrow would be better for me. My schedule tomorrow is flexible. Regards, Ed
On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:29 AM, Jeff McGinness wrote: > Ed > > Sorry for not getting back to you sooner but yes. What is your > schedule like late afternoon today or tomorrow? > > Jeffrey K. McGinness > > > On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:21 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Would you like to get together this weekend? >> >> Ed >> >> >> On Dec 6, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Jeff McGinness wrote: >> >>> Ed >>> >>> I would like to get together again over coffee or otherwise to >>> discuss some of the stuff we have going to be sure I am getting a >>> balanced perspective. >>> >>> Let me know if/when you have time. >>> >>> Jeffrey K. McGinness >>> >>> >>
84
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Jeff McGinness Saturday, December 08, 2012 11:29 AM Edwin Stone Re: ICCSD
Ed Sorry for not getting back to you sooner but yes. What is your schedule like late afternoon today or tomorrow? Jeffrey K. McGinness
On Dec 8, 2012, at 11:21 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote: > Would you like to get together this weekend? > > Ed > > > On Dec 6, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Jeff McGinness wrote: > >> Ed >> >> I would like to get together again over coffee or otherwise to >> discuss some of the stuff we have going to be sure I am getting a >> balanced perspective. >> >> Let me know if/when you have time. >> >> Jeffrey K. McGinness >> >> >
85
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 08, 2012 11:22 AM Jeff McGinness Re: ICCSD
Would you like to get together this weekend? Ed
On Dec 6, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Jeff McGinness wrote: > Ed > > I would like to get together again over coffee or otherwise to discuss > some of the stuff we have going to be sure I am getting a balanced > perspective. > > Let me know if/when you have time. > > Jeffrey K. McGinness > >
86
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 08, 2012 11:21 AM Sarah Swisher Re: How to kill the RPS
Would you like to meet? Ed
On Dec 5, 2012, at 2:34 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote: > OK, so time for a meeting with you sir. Below please find what are > just a few highlights of my political career. You are a scientist and > I am a political and policy professional. We WILL complete the moral, > meaningful and equitable policy, governance and administrative effort > that our children need and deserve. We WILL also win the election > hoping that you personally and/or collectively recognize the greater > good to which this board is committed. In a > dozen years of political work I have never held votes hostage. > Voting is a personal choice and threatening to secede before the > board's policy work is complete very demoralizing. This email is > adressed only to you and has not been copied or forwarded. > > Sarah > See Below: > > Volunteer Activities/ Appointments > 1985---1995 RN Volunteer Johnson County WIC Clinic > 2000---2005 Board of Directors, Johnson County United > Way > 2001 Legislative Interim Committee, > Needle Stick Prevention > 2002---2007 6th Judicial District Nominating Commission > 2002---2003 Co-Chair ICCSD Yes for Kids Bond > Referendum, at the time the largest bond referendum in the history > of state. Required super-majority. 72% yes vote > 2003 Governor Vilsack Task Force on Nursing > 2003 Appointed Honorary Colonel Iowa > National Guard > 2003 Harkin Nurse Advisory Council > 20042006 Board of Directors, Iowa Citizen Action > Network > 2007 Legislative Commission on Affordable > Health Care (Sub-committee chair, workforce issues) > 2008 Culver/Judge Task Force on Nursing > (Sub-committee chair, wages) > 2009---Present Director, ICCSD Board of Education > 2010 Member Johnson County Council of > Government > 2007---Present Member, First Presbyterian Church, Iowa City
87
> 2000---2004 Iowa Comprehensive Cancer Consortium > 2006---2008 Co-Chair Iowa Partnership to Fight > Chronic Disease > 2009---Present Steering Committee member Iowa City Sanctuary City > Committee Elected Public Office 2009---Present Director, ICCSD Board > of Education Union Offices > 1998 Organizing Committee, SEIU UIHC successful campaign > 1999 Local 199 Steering Committee > 1999---2010 Local 199 Executive Board > 19992010 Local 199 COPE Chair > 2000---2003 President SEIU UIHC Chapter > 2000---2006 Vice President, Iowa Federation of Labor > 2006---2010 Secretary, Iowa Change to Win > Democratic Party Offices > 1980--- 2008 State Convention Delegate > 1984 John Culver Scholarship, 1st Place > 1998--- 2002 Secretary Johnson County Democratic Party > 2002--- 2004 1st Vice Chair Johnson County Democratic Party > 2002 Co-Chair Johnson County for Vilsack > 2002 Co-Chair Nurses for Harkin (State> wide) > 2004---2006 Chair, Johnson County Democratic Party > 2006 Blouin Kitchen Cabnet, Johnson > County Co-Chair > 2004---2006 2nd Vice Chair Iowa Democratic Party > 2006---2008 1st Vice Chair Iowa Democratic Party > 2006---2009 Member, Democratic National Committee > 2007---2009 Rules and By-laws Committee Member, DNC > 2008 Super Delegate National Democratic > Party Convention > 2007---2008 Member DNC Rural Caucus > 2004---2008 Campaign director Iowa House senate Races > winning majority in Iowa House and a total of 9 out of 12 races > coordinated, 3 of them dark horses. > > > ________________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 8:14 AM > To: Stephen Murley > Cc: Board; council@iowa-city.org > Subject: How to kill the RPS > > Hi Steve, > > I don't know what tea leaves you are consulting but the RPS isn't > doing so well in my neighborhood right now. > > The ICCSD has an absolutely abysmal track record over the past 10 > years for managing disparity of enrollment, FRL or physical facilities > and few people south of I-80 think that $100M -- by itself -- is going > to change that. > > Many people, including myself, WANT to believe that things will > change and DO believe in the intent and the integrity of the subset of > board members who have consistently taken meaningful actions to make
88
> things better. However, for people to believe it enough to vote for > the extremely broad RPS, they will need to see an equity policy > enacted. One with teeth: one that will move high school kids NOW, > build east side elementary schools NOW and refurbish older buildings > NOW. One that will ensure that if a new high school is built, it will > be done in a way that will not worsen curricular disparities and > increase socioeconomic and racial segregation. > > However, if you are one of the many people who want the RPS vote to > fail in February, here are three things you can do to make SURE that > it does. > > 1) Keep making public statements that show that you are totally > opposed to redistricting at the high school level and that the only > solution you can imagine for the overcrowding at West High is the > construction of a third high school (with an even lower FRL) north of > I-80 as soon as physically possible. You might for example give the > Press Citizen a quote like: "We would much rather be able to slide > [the new high school] forward than have to push it back". Every quote > like this is a 45 caliber slug to the chest of the RPS. It might > survive with urgent surgery but I doubt it. > > 2) Buy land for a third high school before the RPS vote. This way > everyone will KNOW that the fix is in and all this equity talk is just > talk. This action would not be survivable. > > 3) Fail to pass a meaningful equity policy -- with teeth -- before > January 10. You can accomplish this nail in the RPS coffin by having > board members who favor segregation use the word "busing" a lot in > committee meetings and board meetings. This is a great inflammatory > word that has been used to accelerate segregation of communities for > more than 50 years. They can also object to things here and there on > procedural grounds. You can have Ann Feldmann pipe up from time to > time and ask why 10% points of FRL is so important. Why not 15%? > 20%? Things like that. Just slow the process down, water it down, > make it nothing. Make sure that the community understands that the > current ICCSD administration stands for "neighborhood schools" full of > affluent folks in the north part of the ICCSD and "neighborhood > schools" with aging, un-air-conditioned, roach infested buildings full > of non-affluent folks in the south. > > You are well on your way to killing the RPS. Just keep doing the > things you are doing and you will succeed. > > Ed
89
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: John Bacon Friday, December 07, 2012 4:19 PM Edwin Stone Letter for naming
Ed, IknowyouareaverybusymanandyouhavedoneSOmuchforourschools.Ihatetoaskyouforanotherfavor,butdo youthinkyoucouldwritealetterofsupporttonamethenewfineartswingafterCandyWiebener?Theletterdoesnot havetobesuperlong,asIthinkthiswillbeaslamdunk.Ijusthavebeeninstructedtogatherlettersfromseveral parentsandfacultymembers.IdneeditbymidJanuary.Thanks!JohnBacon
90
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Thursday, December 06, 2012 2:23 PM Jeff McGinness Re: ICCSD
What is your schedule like this weekend? Ed
On Dec 6, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Jeff McGinness wrote: > Ed > > I would like to get together again over coffee or otherwise to discuss > some of the stuff we have going to be sure I am getting a balanced > perspective. > > Let me know if/when you have time. > > Jeffrey K. McGinness > >
91
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Jeff McGinness Thursday, December 06, 2012 12:39 PM Edwin Stone ICCSD
Ed I would like to get together again over coffee or otherwise to discuss some of the stuff we have going to be sure I am getting a balanced perspective. Let me know if/when you have time. Jeffrey K. McGinness
92
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Wednesday, December 05, 2012 6:34 PM Edwin Stone FW: Thank you. Stay strong:)
Please review my communication with Janet. Thanks. ________________________________________ From: Janet Clark [redjcmarie@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 2:51 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Re: Thank you. Stay strong:) Hello Sarah, Thanks so much for your reply, and for all you do! I did not know that you were a palliative care nurse! I will compose something more thorough later, I love the idea of an IB at City and only City. It has to be done SOON to have the desired effect:) I would support a new high high school when our existing secondary buildings are over-capacity AND there is equity in secondary facilities and FRL. That means I would support it tomorrow if these conditions were met. There is no reason not to maximize our current facilities. Why engineer City's 2005 addition so it would support an eventual third floor, and then not make use of the inexpensive option of adding to City. The addition, if it staved off even a few years of third high school operating costs, would "pay for itself". What space does the IB program need? To be clear, I don't know anyone who doesn't support a third high school when it is needed. But as there has been no effort to utilize City's capacity, and as Murley clearly has a favorite son among his high school administrators, and as the two high school scenario is being ignored, well, to my view there are only nefarious reasons to be pushing ahead with another facility under these circumstances. Is it my imagination, or is this the first year that preschool numbers were included in enrollment numbers? Sneaking preschool numbers into the overall enrollment numbers to beef up the 'catastrophic" increase is not helpful. I am concerned about the capacity consultation. I believe that the way the questions are asked will determine the answer, and I do not trust that the numbers will not be swayed in some way to make City look more full than it is. Thanks again Sarah! Keeping my eyes on the prize:) Janet On 12/5/12, Sarah Swisher <Sarah.Swisher@iccsd.k12.ia.us> wrote: > Dear Janet: > > Thank you for your supportive words. I would like to ask for your > thoughts on this: IF we can get International Baccalaureate for CH > (and only CH), IF we moved some students next year, and the High > Schools WILL all have to be within 10% minority student ratios of each
93
> other (dependent on how aggressive we can be with the limitations > policy--moderately aggressive, I would guess) what is wrong with the third HS at the end of this decade. > > I don't mean this to be critical but "keep you eyes on the prize, oh > Lord, oh Lord." > > We know that CH's capacity report will come back at about, hmmm I > guess 75 to 80%, my grandchildren can figure out that if you add 14 > classrooms your capacity for more students increases (they are very > smart 5 year olds)----so in is likely that some students will be > moved, equitably and rationally, to a CH enrollment area. > > Khalenburg urges voluntary incented choice. We can't force transfers > to meet all of our diversity goals---we must incent at both the > elementary and the secondary levels. > > That said the community was clearly promised a two comprehensive high > school scenario--I am a witness---and above all else we must be true > to our public commitment. I am happy to help expedite this overdue > report in anyway that the officers and board see as appropriate. > > Respectfully seeking curative therapy, > Sarah, OCN, CHPN, RN (tee hee---certified palliative care nurse!) > > ________________________________________ > From: Janet Clark [redjcmarie@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 9:53 AM > To: Karla Cook; Marla Swesey; Sally Hoelscher; Sarah Swisher > Subject: Thank you. Stay strong:) > > Dear Marla, Karla, Sarah and Sally, > > Thank you for your attention to equity. It really is a light in an > otherwise dark place, with regard to the current issues. > > I was concerned about some things said in the meeting last night. If > Mr Murley wants to kill the RPS he may want to just keep saying he > wants to move up the 3rd high school. > > How can the community be assured that a two high school model is being > enthusiastically considered? Since it doesn't seem to be being > considered at all? We can't build a whole other high school just to > avoid redistricting. > > There is no way that 32 million is going to get our neglected > facilities to where they need to be. > > If no real equity policy passes, WITH a mechanism to enforce it, I am > very concerned that there will be a backlash of rage and devision that > will make our current squabble look like a tea party. I say this not > with the intention of using fear tactics, but because I am genuinely > concerned that our community is getting to a point that we can only > hope for palliation, and not healing. > > I am so encouraged by reading Kahlenberg's work. We can fix this. > The complaints about how painful it will be ignore how painful it is
94
> now. But no elementary district can believe it is a sacred cow. If > re-districting in the past was truly out of the question, why is it > out of the question for Wickham, but not for Hills? > > Other communities re-district, as long as one has equity in the > schools it isn't a huge issue. > > Thanks again for all you do. I would go on about how much I > appreciate you all, but I was dismayed at some of the fawning at the > meeting last night, and wouldn't want what I would like to say to > resemble that, or appear to come with an agenda. :) > > Best regards, > > Janet Clark
95
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Wednesday, December 05, 2012 2:58 PM Sarah Swisher Re: How to kill the RPS
Hi Sarah. I am not threatening to secede. I am simply commenting on the two pages of Steve's raise and the imminent 3rd high school in the paper today without a syllable about an equity policy.
I am letting you know, in case it is helpful, that hundreds of people (not just me) have with a superintendent publicly accelerating the movement toward a 10% FRL 3rd high school while talking about how crowded West High is and being absolutely tone deaf to the needs of the rest of the community. You should shut Steve up -- or better yet, get him to say publicly that kids WILL NEED TO BE MOVED SOON at the high school level. There is no other path to equity. I look forward to meeting with you at your convenience. This email has also been addressed only to you and has not been copied or forwarded. Ed
HAD IT
On Dec 5, 2012, at 2:34 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote:
OK, so time for a meeting with you sir. Below please find what are just a few highlights of my political career. You are a scientist and I am a political and policy professional. We WILL complete the moral, meaningful and equitable policy, governance and administrative effort that our children need and deserve. We WILL also win the election hoping that you personally and/or collectively recognize the greater good to which this board is committed. In a dozen years of political work I have never held votes hostage. Voting is a personal choice and threatening to secede before the board's policy work is complete very demoralizing. This email is adressed only to you and has not been copied or forwarded. Sarah See Below: Volunteer Activities/ Appointments 1985---1995 RN Volunteer Johnson County WIC Clinic 2000---2005 Board of Directors, Johnson County United Way 2001 Legislative Interim Committee, Needle Stick Prevention 2002---2007 6th Judicial District Nominating Commission 2002---2003 Co-Chair ICCSD Yes for Kids Bond Referendum, at the time the largest bond referendum
96
in the history of state. Required super-majority. 72% yes vote 2003 Governor Vilsack Task Force on Nursing 2003 Appointed Honorary Colonel Iowa National Guard 2003 Harkin Nurse Advisory Council 20042006 Board of Directors, Iowa Citizen Action Network 2007 Legislative Commission on Affordable Health Care (Sub-committee chair, workforce issues) 2008 Culver/Judge Task Force on Nursing (Sub-committee chair, wages) 2009---Present Director, ICCSD Board of Education 2010 Member Johnson County Council of Government 2007---Present Member, First Presbyterian Church, Iowa City 2000---2004 Iowa Comprehensive Cancer Consortium 2006---2008 Co-Chair Iowa Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease 2009---Present Steering Committee member Iowa City Sanctuary City Committee Elected Public Office 2009---Present Director, ICCSD Board of Education Union Offices 1998 Organizing Committee, SEIU UIHC successful campaign 1999 Local 199 Steering Committee 1999---2010 Local 199 Executive Board 19992010 Local 199 COPE Chair 2000---2003 President SEIU UIHC Chapter 2000---2006 Vice President, Iowa Federation of Labor 2006---2010 Secretary, Iowa Change to Win Democratic Party Offices 1980--- 2008 State Convention Delegate 1984 John Culver Scholarship, 1st Place 1998--- 2002 Secretary Johnson County Democratic Party 2002--- 2004 1st Vice Chair Johnson County Democratic Party 2002 Co-Chair Johnson County for Vilsack 2002 Co-Chair Nurses for Harkin (State-wide) 2004---2006 Chair, Johnson County Democratic Party 2006 Blouin Kitchen Cabnet, Johnson County Co-Chair 2004---2006 2nd Vice Chair Iowa Democratic Party 2006---2008 1st Vice Chair Iowa Democratic Party 2006---2009 Member, Democratic National Committee 2007---2009 Rules and By-laws Committee Member, DNC 2008 Super Delegate National Democratic Party Convention 2007---2008 Member DNC Rural Caucus 2004---2008 Campaign director Iowa House senate Races winning majority in Iowa House and a total of 9 out of 12 races coordinated, 3 of them dark horses.
________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 8:14 AM To: Stephen Murley Cc: Board; council@iowa-city.org Subject: How to kill the RPS
97
Hi Steve, I don't know what tea leaves you are consulting but the RPS isn't doing so well in my neighborhood right now. The ICCSD has an absolutely abysmal track record over the past 10 years for managing disparity of enrollment, FRL or physical facilities and few people south of I-80 think that $100M -- by itself -- is going to change that. Many people, including myself, WANT to believe that things will change and DO believe in the intent and the integrity of the subset of board members who have consistently taken meaningful actions to make things better. However, for people to believe it enough to vote for the extremely broad RPS, they will need to see an equity policy enacted. One with teeth: one that will move high school kids NOW, build east side elementary schools NOW and refurbish older buildings NOW. One that will ensure that if a new high school is built, it will be done in a way that will not worsen curricular disparities and increase socioeconomic and racial segregation. However, if you are one of the many people who want the RPS vote to fail in February, here are three things you can do to make SURE that it does. 1) Keep making public statements that show that you are totally opposed to redistricting at the high school level and that the only solution you can imagine for the overcrowding at West High is the construction of a third high school (with an even lower FRL) north of I-80 as soon as physically possible. You might for example give the Press Citizen a quote like: "We would much rather be able to slide [the new high school] forward than have to push it back". Every quote like this is a 45 caliber slug to the chest of the RPS. It might survive with urgent surgery but I doubt it. 2) Buy land for a third high school before the RPS vote. This way everyone will KNOW that the fix is in and all this equity talk is just talk. This action would not be survivable. 3) Fail to pass a meaningful equity policy -- with teeth -- before January 10. You can accomplish this nail in the RPS coffin by having board members who favor segregation use the word "busing" a lot in committee meetings and board meetings. This is a great inflammatory word that has been used to accelerate segregation of communities for more than 50 years. They can also object to things here and there on procedural grounds. You can have Ann Feldmann pipe up from time to time and ask why 10% points of FRL is so important. Why not 15%? 20%? Things like that. Just slow the process down, water it down, make it nothing. Make sure that the community understands that the current ICCSD administration stands for "neighborhood schools" full of affluent folks in the north part of the ICCSD and "neighborhood
98
schools" with aging, un-air-conditioned, roach infested buildings full of non-affluent folks in the south. You are well on your way to killing the RPS. Just keep doing the things you are doing and you will succeed. Ed
99
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Wednesday, December 05, 2012 2:35 PM Edwin Stone RE: How to kill the RPS
OK, so time for a meeting with you sir. Below please find what are just a few highlights of my political career. You are a scientist and I am a political and policy professional. We WILL complete the moral, meaningful and equitable policy, governance and administrative effort that our children need and deserve. We WILL also win the election hoping that you personally and/or collectively recognize the greater good to which this board is committed. In a dozen years of political work I have never held votes hostage. Voting is a personal choice and threatening to secede before the board's policy work is complete very demoralizing. This email is adressed only to you and has not been copied or forwarded. Sarah See Below: Volunteer Activities/ Appointments 1985---1995 RN Volunteer Johnson County WIC Clinic 2000---2005 Board of Directors, Johnson County United Way 2001 Legislative Interim Committee, Needle Stick Prevention 2002---2007 6th Judicial District Nominating Commission 2002---2003 Co-Chair ICCSD Yes for Kids Bond Referendum, at the time the largest bond referendum in the history of state. Required super-majority. 72% yes vote 2003 Governor Vilsack Task Force on Nursing 2003 Appointed Honorary Colonel Iowa National Guard 2003 Harkin Nurse Advisory Council 20042006 Board of Directors, Iowa Citizen Action Network 2007 Legislative Commission on Affordable Health Care (Sub-committee chair, workforce issues) 2008 Culver/Judge Task Force on Nursing (Sub-committee chair, wages) 2009---Present Director, ICCSD Board of Education 2010 Member Johnson County Council of Government 2007---Present Member, First Presbyterian Church, Iowa City 2000---2004 Iowa Comprehensive Cancer Consortium 2006---2008 Co-Chair Iowa Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease 2009---Present Steering Committee member Iowa City Sanctuary City Committee Elected Public Office 2009---Present Director, ICCSD Board of Education Union Offices 1998 Organizing Committee, SEIU UIHC successful campaign 1999 Local 199 Steering Committee 1999---2010 Local 199 Executive Board 19992010 Local 199 COPE Chair 2000---2003 President SEIU UIHC Chapter 2000---2006 Vice President, Iowa Federation of Labor 2006---2010 Secretary, Iowa Change to Win Democratic Party Offices 1980--- 2008 State Convention Delegate 1984 John Culver Scholarship, 1st Place 1998--- 2002 Secretary Johnson County Democratic Party 2002--- 2004 1st Vice Chair Johnson County Democratic Party 2002 Co-Chair Johnson County for Vilsack 2002 Co-Chair Nurses for Harkin (State-wide) 2004---2006 Chair, Johnson County Democratic Party 2006 Blouin Kitchen Cabnet, Johnson County Co-Chair
100
2004---2006 2nd Vice Chair Iowa Democratic Party 2006---2008 1st Vice Chair Iowa Democratic Party 2006---2009 Member, Democratic National Committee 2007---2009 Rules and By-laws Committee Member, DNC 2008 Super Delegate National Democratic Party Convention 2007---2008 Member DNC Rural Caucus 2004---2008 Campaign director Iowa House senate Races winning majority in Iowa House and a total of 9 out of 12 races coordinated, 3 of them dark horses.
________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 8:14 AM To: Stephen Murley Cc: Board; council@iowa-city.org Subject: How to kill the RPS Hi Steve, I don't know what tea leaves you are consulting but the RPS isn't doing so well in my neighborhood right now. The ICCSD has an absolutely abysmal track record over the past 10 years for managing disparity of enrollment, FRL or physical facilities and few people south of I-80 think that $100M -- by itself -- is going to change that. Many people, including myself, WANT to believe that things will change and DO believe in the intent and the integrity of the subset of board members who have consistently taken meaningful actions to make things better. However, for people to believe it enough to vote for the extremely broad RPS, they will need to see an equity policy enacted. One with teeth: one that will move high school kids NOW, build east side elementary schools NOW and refurbish older buildings NOW. One that will ensure that if a new high school is built, it will be done in a way that will not worsen curricular disparities and increase socioeconomic and racial segregation. However, if you are one of the many people who want the RPS vote to fail in February, here are three things you can do to make SURE that it does. 1) Keep making public statements that show that you are totally opposed to redistricting at the high school level and that the only solution you can imagine for the overcrowding at West High is the construction of a third high school (with an even lower FRL) north of I-80 as soon as physically possible. You might for example give the Press Citizen a quote like: "We would much rather be able to slide [the new high school] forward than have to push it back". Every quote like this is a 45 caliber slug to the chest of the RPS. It might survive with urgent surgery but I doubt it. 2) Buy land for a third high school before the RPS vote. This way everyone will KNOW that the fix is in and all this equity talk is just talk. This action would not be survivable. 3) Fail to pass a meaningful equity policy -- with teeth -- before January 10. You can accomplish this nail in the RPS coffin by having board members who favor segregation use the word "busing" a lot in committee meetings and board meetings. This is a great inflammatory word that has been used to accelerate segregation of communities for more than 50 years. They can also object to things here and there on procedural grounds. You can have Ann Feldmann pipe up from time to time and ask why 10% points of FRL is so important. Why not 15%? 20%? Things like that. Just slow the process down, water it down, make it nothing. Make sure that the community understands that the current ICCSD administration stands for "neighborhood schools" full of affluent folks in the north part of the ICCSD and "neighborhood schools" with aging, un-air-conditioned, roach infested buildings full of nonaffluent folks in the south. You are well on your way to killing the RPS. Just keep doing the things you are doing and you will succeed.
101
Ed
102
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Wednesday, December 05, 2012 8:15 AM Stephen Murley Board; council@iowa-city.org How to kill the RPS
Hi Steve, I don't know what tea leaves you are consulting but the RPS isn't doing so well in my neighborhood right now. The ICCSD has an absolutely abysmal track record over the past 10 years for managing disparity of enrollment, FRL or physical facilities and few people south of I-80 think that $100M -- by itself -- is going to change that. Many people, including myself, WANT to believe that things will change and DO believe in the intent and the integrity of the subset of board members who have consistently taken meaningful actions to make things better. However, for people to believe it enough to vote for the extremely broad RPS, they will need to see an equity policy enacted. One with teeth: one that will move high school kids NOW, build east side elementary schools NOW and refurbish older buildings NOW. One that will ensure that if a new high school is built, it will be done in a way that will not worsen curricular disparities and increase socioeconomic and racial segregation. However, if you are one of the many people who want the RPS vote to fail in February, here are three things you can do to make SURE that it does. 1) Keep making public statements that show that you are totally opposed to redistricting at the high school level and that the only solution you can imagine for the overcrowding at West High is the construction of a third high school (with an even lower FRL) north of I-80 as soon as physically possible. You might for example give the Press Citizen a quote like: "We would much rather be able to slide [the new high school] forward than have to push it back". Every quote like this is a 45 caliber slug to the chest of the RPS. It might survive with urgent surgery but I doubt it. 2) Buy land for a third high school before the RPS vote. This way everyone will KNOW that the fix is in and all this equity talk is just talk. This action would not be survivable. 3) Fail to pass a meaningful equity policy -- with teeth -- before January 10. You can accomplish this nail in the RPS coffin by having board members who favor segregation use the word "busing" a lot in committee meetings and board meetings. This is a great inflammatory word that has been used to accelerate segregation of communities for more than 50 years. They can also object to things here and there on procedural grounds. You can have Ann Feldmann pipe up from time to time and ask why 10% points of FRL is so important. Why not 15%? 20%? Things like that. Just slow the process down, water it down, make it nothing. Make sure that the community understands that the current ICCSD administration stands for "neighborhood schools" full of affluent folks in the north part of the ICCSD and "neighborhood schools" with aging, un-air-conditioned, roach infested buildings full of nonaffluent folks in the south. You are well on your way to killing the RPS. Just keep doing the things you are doing and you will succeed. Ed
103
104
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sally Hoelscher Tuesday, December 04, 2012 11:27 AM Edwin Stone RE: Phone Call?
Hi Ed, Sorry for the delayed response. I was out-of-town without internet or cell phone access from Thursday to yesterday and am now trying to catch up on the backlog. I'm happy to speak with you by phone any time. I'll be available today from 1:30 to 4:30ish and any other morning this week. Sally Sally Hoelscher School Board Iowa City Community School District 319-541-2622 ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:53 PM To: Sally Hoelscher Subject: Phone Call? Hi Sally, Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? Regards, Ed
105
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Monday, December 03, 2012 9:04 AM Sally Hoelscher Insular Gerrymandering
Hi Sally, It occurred to me last night that the equity statement you and your colleagues are working on would be a good place to do away with insular gerrymandering (IG). IG is defined as the creation of small elementary attendance areas completely surrounded by the attendance areas of one or more other elementary schools. There are 3 of these in the ICCSD now: Lake Ridge mobile home park (1 on the attached map) the Pheasant Ridge Apartments (2) and a zone in the Penn enrollment area (3). I believe that the creation and/or maintenance of such zones should only be allowed if two conditions are met: 1) the students in the IG zone will attend a school with a lower FRL than the school they would have attended without IG; and, 2) the school(s) the IG students will attend (elementary, junior high and senior high) will all move closer to the district FRL average (or stay the same) than they would be without the IG zone. With these rules, the Lake Ridge zone would not be allowed because it moves kids to a less affluent elementary than they would otherwise attend (Twain instead of Weber) AND it moves the FRL of SEJH and City High further from the district average. The Pheasant Ridge zone would not be allowed because it moves kids to a less affluent elementary than they would otherwise attend (Weber instead of either Horn of Borlaug). Zone 3 in the Penn area would be allowed because it moves kids to a school with a lower FRL (Garner instead of Penn), takes Garner closer to the district average, and leaves the makeup of the junior high and senior high unchanged. Thanks for considering this. Regards, Ed
106
107
108
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Monday, December 03, 2012 9:04 AM Marla Swesey Insular Gerrymandering
Hi Marla, It occurred to me last night that the equity statement you and your colleagues are working on would be a good place to do away with insular gerrymandering (IG). IG is defined as the creation of small elementary attendance areas completely surrounded by the attendance areas of one or more other elementary schools. There are 3 of these in the ICCSD now: Lake Ridge mobile home park (1 on the attached map) the Pheasant Ridge Apartments (2) and a zone in the Penn enrollment area (3). I believe that the creation and/or maintenance of such zones should only be allowed if two conditions are met: 1) the students in the IG zone will attend a school with a lower FRL than the school they would have attended without IG; and, 2) the school(s) the IG students will attend (elementary, junior high and senior high) will all move closer to the district FRL average (or stay the same) than they would be without the IG zone. With these rules, the Lake Ridge zone would not be allowed because it moves kids to a less affluent elementary than they would otherwise attend (Twain instead of Weber) AND it moves the FRL of SEJH and City High further from the district average. The Pheasant Ridge zone would not be allowed because it moves kids to a less affluent elementary than they would otherwise attend (Weber instead of either Horn of Borlaug). Zone 3 in the Penn area would be allowed because it moves kids to a school with a lower FRL (Garner instead of Penn), takes Garner closer to the district average, and leaves the makeup of the junior high and senior high unchanged. Thanks for considering this. Regards, Ed
109
110
111
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Monday, December 03, 2012 9:04 AM Karla Cook Insular Gerrymandering
Hi Karla, It occurred to me last night that the equity statement you and your colleagues are working on would be a good place to do away with insular gerrymandering (IG). IG is defined as the creation of small elementary attendance areas completely surrounded by the attendance areas of one or more other elementary schools. There are 3 of these in the ICCSD now: Lake Ridge mobile home park (1 on the attached map) the Pheasant Ridge Apartments (2) and a zone in the Penn enrollment area (3). I believe that the creation and/or maintenance of such zones should only be allowed if two conditions are met: 1) the students in the IG zone will attend a school with a lower FRL than the school they would have attended without IG; and, 2) the school(s) the IG students will attend (elementary, junior high and senior high) will all move closer to the district FRL average (or stay the same) than they would be without the IG zone. With these rules, the Lake Ridge zone would not be allowed because it moves kids to a less affluent elementary than they would otherwise attend (Twain instead of Weber) AND it moves the FRL of SEJH and City High further from the district average. The Pheasant Ridge zone would not be allowed because it moves kids to a less affluent elementary than they would otherwise attend (Weber instead of either Horn of Borlaug). Zone 3 in the Penn area would be allowed because it moves kids to a school with a lower FRL (Garner instead of Penn), takes Garner closer to the district average, and leaves the makeup of the junior high and senior high unchanged. Thanks for considering this. Regards, Ed
112
113
114
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Monday, December 03, 2012 9:03 AM Sarah Swisher Insular Gerrymandering
Hi Sarah, It occurred to me last night that the equity statement you and your colleagues are working on would be a good place to do away with insular gerrymandering (IG). IG is defined as the creation of small elementary attendance areas completely surrounded by the attendance areas of one or more other elementary schools. There are 3 of these in the ICCSD now: Lake Ridge mobile home park (1 on the attached map) the Pheasant Ridge Apartments (2) and a zone in the Penn enrollment area (3). I believe that the creation and/or maintenance of such zones should only be allowed if two conditions are met: 1) the students in the IG zone will attend a school with a lower FRL than the school they would have attended without IG; and, 2) the school(s) the IG students will attend (elementary, junior high and senior high) will all move closer to the district FRL average (or stay the same) than they would be without the IG zone. With these rules, the Lake Ridge zone would not be allowed because it moves kids to a less affluent elementary than they would otherwise attend (Twain instead of Weber) AND it moves the FRL of SEJH and City High further from the district average. The Pheasant Ridge zone would not be allowed because it moves kids to a less affluent elementary than they would otherwise attend (Weber instead of either Horn of Borlaug). Zone 3 in the Penn area would be allowed because it moves kids to a school with a lower FRL (Garner instead of Penn), takes Garner closer to the district average, and leaves the makeup of the junior high and senior high unchanged. Thanks for considering this. Regards, Ed
115
116
117
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Monday, December 03, 2012 8:46 AM Jeff McGinness Stephen Murley; Board Re: High School Calculator High School Designer v3.3 FD.xls
Yes Jeff, that was an error. Thanks for catching it. I created this calculator a few months ago using old numbers and as you know Weber went from "blue" to "orange" in one year. Attached is version 3.3. Regards, Ed
On Dec 3, 2012, at 8:23 AM, Jeff McGinness wrote: > Ed > > I assume Weber shaded as blue is an error as its above the 30% you > use as a threshold? > > Jeffrey K. McGinness > > > > On Dec 2, 2012, at 10:19 PM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com<mailto:stone.edwin@gmail.com > >> wrote: > > Dear Board Members, > > I am writing to share a tool that I created for evaluating the effects > of boundary changes at the high school level. It consists of an excel > spreadsheet that allows the user to assign various elementary > enrollment areas to any of three high schools and to see the effect of > those assignments on the enrollment and FRL numbers for each of the > schools. I have also included a text document that explains how to > use the tool. I hope that you will find these documents useful. > Please let me know if you have any suggestions for making the > spreadsheet better. > > Regards, > > Ed > >
118
> > > <High School Designer v3.2 FD.xls> > <How to Use the High School Designer Spreadsheet FD.docx>
119
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Jeff McGinness Monday, December 03, 2012 8:24 AM Edwin Stone Stephen Murley Re: High School Calculator
Ed I assume Weber shaded as blue is an error as its above the 30% you use as a threshold? Jeffrey K. McGinness
On Dec 2, 2012, at 10:19 PM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Board Members, I am writing to share a tool that I created for evaluating the effects of boundary changes at the high school level. It consists of an excel spreadsheet that allows the user to assign various elementary enrollment areas to any of three high schools and to see the effect of those assignments on the enrollment and FRL numbers for each of the schools. I have also included a text document that explains how to use the tool. I hope that you will find these documents useful. Please let me know if you have any suggestions for making the spreadsheet better. Regards, Ed
<High School Designer v3.2 FD.xls> <How to Use the High School Designer Spreadsheet FD.docx>
120
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Stephen Murley Monday, December 03, 2012 6:28 AM Edwin Stone Board; council@iowa-city.org; Administrators ESC Re: High School Calculator
Good Morning Ed Thank you for sharing your efforts with us. The District is currently working to implement new attendance zone software that will link with our Power School data and provide accurate demographic data for any new attendance zone configuration. This data will become part of the recommendations that the administrative team annually brings before the Board. Steve On Dec 2, 2012, at 10:19 PM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote:
121
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Stephen Murley Monday, December 03, 2012 6:28 AM Edwin Stone Board; council@iowa-city.org; Administrators ESC Re: High School Calculator
Good Morning Ed Thank you for sharing your efforts with us. The District is currently working to implement new attendance zone software that will link with our Power School data and provide accurate demographic data for any new attendance zone configuration. This data will become part of the recommendations that the administrative team annually brings before the Board. Steve On Dec 2, 2012, at 10:19 PM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote:
122
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Sunday, December 02, 2012 10:19 PM Board Stephen Murley; council@iowa-city.org High School Calculator High School Designer v3.2 FD.xls; How to Use the High School Designer Spreadsheet FD.docx
123
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Sunday, December 02, 2012 9:02 PM Edwin Stone RE: Equity Considerations
Thanks, Ed. You are corredt on language change, in my mind. Sarah ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2012 8:13 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Equity Considerations Hi Sarah, I am very pleased to hear that the board is considering adopting an equity policy. For this policy to be meaningful, I think that the FRL disparity limits at the high school level should be "no more than ten percentage points" between the highest and lowest FRL high school and "no more than fifteen percentage points" between the highest and lowest FRL junior high school. There are two problems with the phrase "ten percentage points above or below the district mean". First, this is a 20 point difference which is too high. Second, secondary schools have lower FRL than "all schools" so using the overall district average would incorrectly increase the point at which the policy would take effect. For example, this year "ten percentage points above the district mean" would be 43.76%. In contrast, 10% above the lowest FRL high school would be 34.65%. The latter number seems like the more appropriate number if the goal is to balance diversity in the district. It is also extremely important that the "ten (or fifteen) percentage points between the highest and lowest school" should be the criterion for limiting affluent migration from one school to another within the district. Regards, Ed
124
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Sunday, December 02, 2012 8:24 PM Sally Hoelscher Equity Considerations
Hi Sally, I am very pleased to hear that the board is considering adopting an equity policy. For this policy to be meaningful, I think that the FRL disparity limits at the high school level should be "no more than ten percentage points" between the highest and lowest FRL high school and "no more than fifteen percentage points" between the highest and lowest FRL junior high school. There are two problems with the phrase "ten percentage points above or below the district mean". First, this is a 20 point difference which is too high. Second, secondary schools have lower FRL than "all schools" so using the overall district average would incorrectly increase the point at which the policy would take effect. For example, this year "ten percentage points above the district mean" would be 43.76%. In contrast, 10% above the lowest FRL high school would be 34.65%. The latter number seems like the more appropriate number if the goal is to balance diversity in the district. It is also extremely important that the "ten (or fifteen) percentage points between the highest and lowest school" should be the criterion for limiting affluent migration from one school to another within the district. Regards, Ed
125
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Sunday, December 02, 2012 8:22 PM Marla Swesey Re: Phone Call?
Hi Marla, Thanks very much for your availability. I am sorry that I couldn't call you today. I wanted to tell you that I am very pleased to hear that the board is considering adopting an equity policy. For this policy to be meaningful, I think that the FRL disparity limits at the high school level should be "no more than ten percentage points" between the highest and lowest FRL high school and "no more than fifteen percentage points" between the highest and lowest FRL junior high school. There are two problems with the phrase "ten percentage points above or below the district mean". First, this is a 20 point difference which is too high. Second, secondary schools have lower FRL than "all schools" so using the overall district average would incorrectly increase the point at which the policy would take effect. For example, this year "ten percentage points above the district mean" would be 43.76%. In contrast, 10% above the lowest FRL high school would be 34.65%. The latter number seems like the more appropriate number if the goal is to balance diversity in the district. It is also extremely important that the "ten (or fifteen) percentage points between the highest and lowest school" should be the criterion for limiting affluent migration from one school to another within the district. I look forward to talking with you about this and the RPS when we can find a time. Regards, Ed On Dec 1, 2012, at 4:30 PM, Marla Swesey wrote: > Ed- Sure- How about Sunday afternoon some time? Does that work for > you? > Marla > ________________________________________ > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:53 PM > To: Marla Swesey > Subject: Phone Call? > > Hi Marla, > > Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? > > Regards, > > Ed >
126
>
127
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Sunday, December 02, 2012 8:19 PM Karla Cook Thanks
Hi Karla, Thanks very much for your availability. I am sorry that I couldn't call you today. Tomorrow after 1 should work well for me. I will call as soon as I can in the afternoon. It may be about 2 or 2:30. I am very pleased to hear that the board is considering adopting an equity policy. For this policy to be meaningful, I think that the FRL disparity limits at the high school level should be "no more than ten percentage points" between the highest and lowest FRL high school and "no more than fifteen percentage points" between the highest and lowest FRL junior high school. There are two problems with the phrase "ten percentage points above or below the district mean". First, this is a 20 point difference which is too high. Second, secondary schools have lower FRL than "all schools" so using the overall district average would incorrectly increase the point at which the policy would take effect. For example, this year "ten percentage points above the district mean" would be 43.76%. In contrast, 10% above the lowest FRL high school would be 34.65%. The latter number seems like the more appropriate number if the goal is to balance diversity in the district. It is also extremely important that the "ten (or fifteen) percentage points between the highest and lowest school" should be the criterion for limiting affluent migration from one school to another within the district. I look forward to talking with you about this. Regards, Ed On Dec 2, 2012, at 8:01 PM, Karla Cook wrote: > Hi Ed, > > As Sunday afternoon didn't work for you, how about Monday after 1 or > it will have to be Wed in the afternoon > > Hope this works, > Karla > > > > > From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] > Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:53 PM > To: Karla Cook > Subject: Phone Call? >
128
> Hi Karla, > > Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? > > Regards, > > Ed
129
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Sunday, December 02, 2012 8:14 PM Sarah Swisher Equity Considerations
Hi Sarah, I am very pleased to hear that the board is considering adopting an equity policy. For this policy to be meaningful, I think that the FRL disparity limits at the high school level should be "no more than ten percentage points" between the highest and lowest FRL high school and "no more than fifteen percentage points" between the highest and lowest FRL junior high school. There are two problems with the phrase "ten percentage points above or below the district mean". First, this is a 20 point difference which is too high. Second, secondary schools have lower FRL than "all schools" so using the overall district average would incorrectly increase the point at which the policy would take effect. For example, this year "ten percentage points above the district mean" would be 43.76%. In contrast, 10% above the lowest FRL high school would be 34.65%. The latter number seems like the more appropriate number if the goal is to balance diversity in the district. It is also extremely important that the "ten (or fifteen) percentage points between the highest and lowest school" should be the criterion for limiting affluent migration from one school to another within the district. Regards, Ed
130
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Karla Cook Sunday, December 02, 2012 8:02 PM Edwin Stone RE: Phone Call?
Hi Ed, As Sunday afternoon didn't work for you, how about Monday after 1 or it will have to be Wed in the afternoon Hope this works, Karla
From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:53 PM To: Karla Cook Subject: Phone Call? Hi Karla, Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? Regards, Ed
131
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Sarah Swisher Sunday, December 02, 2012 6:45 PM Edwin Stone RE: Phone Call? Second draft diversity 11.18.12.docx; Preamble Draft.docx; Report of the Governance Committee November 19.docx
I have included the preamble and the statement I read at the last boe mtg (Report of the Governance Committee). By writing then reading a statement like this it gave me confidence in speaking, getting my points in, before the gal at the end of the table gets a word in. With Gratitude, Sarah ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:53 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Phone Call? Hi Sarah, Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? Regards, Ed
132
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Sarah Swisher Sunday, December 02, 2012 8:37 AM Edwin Stone RE: Phone Call?
yes, this afternon. ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:53 PM To: Sarah Swisher Subject: Phone Call? Hi Sarah, Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? Regards, Ed
133
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Karla Cook Saturday, December 01, 2012 7:54 PM Edwin Stone RE: Phone Call?
Ed. Feel free to call me at home Sunday PM. My number is 338-2455. Karla ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:53 PM To: Karla Cook Subject: Phone Call? Hi Karla, Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? Regards, Ed
134
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Marla Swesey Saturday, December 01, 2012 4:31 PM Edwin Stone RE: Phone Call?
Ed- Sure- How about Sunday afternoon some time? Does that work for you? Marla ________________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:53 PM To: Marla Swesey Subject: Phone Call? Hi Marla, Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? Regards, Ed
135
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:54 PM Sally Hoelscher Phone Call?
Hi Sally, Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? Regards, Ed
136
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:54 PM Marla Swesey Phone Call?
Hi Marla, Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? Regards, Ed
137
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:53 PM Karla Cook Phone Call?
Hi Karla, Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? Regards, Ed
138
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, December 01, 2012 12:53 PM Sarah Swisher Phone Call?
Hi Sarah, Can I talk with you on the phone sometime in the next few days? Regards, Ed
139
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Wednesday, November 28, 2012 9:26 PM Stephen Murley Re: enrollment
Thanks. Ed
On Nov 28, 2012, at 9:13 PM, Stephen Murley wrote:

GoodEveningEd, TheenrollmentreportwillbeappendedtotheBoardAgendaandpostedtomorrow.Ihaveprovidedacopyforyouso thatyoudonothavetogothroughtheagendatofindanddownloadthedocument. Steve Stephen F. Murley Superintendent of Schools Iowa City Community School District 1725 North Dodge Street
Iowa City, IA 52245-9589 Phone: 319-688-1000 Fax: 319-688-1009 Web: http://www.iowacityschools.org Community Engagement: http://www.engageiowacityschools.org
<image003.jpg>
<aa_ICCSD_Enrollment_Report_2012_13FINAL.pdf.pdf>
140
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Stephen Murley Wednesday, November 28, 2012 9:13 PM Edwin Stone enrollment aa_ICCSD_Enrollment_Report_2012_13FINAL.pdf.pdf
GoodEveningEd, TheenrollmentreportwillbeappendedtotheBoardAgendaandpostedtomorrow.Ihaveprovidedacopyforyouso thatyoudonothavetogothroughtheagendatofindanddownloadthedocument. Steve

Stephen F. Murley
141
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Jeff McGinness Tuesday, November 27, 2012 3:19 PM Edwin Stone Fwd: certified enrollment 2012-13 Enrollment Sumamry.pdf; ATT00001.htm; image003.jpg; ATT00002.htm
Assume you have this already but in case you don't its attached. Jeffrey K. McGinness
Begin forwarded message: From: "Stephen Murley" <Murley.Stephen@iccsd.k12.ia.us> To: "Board" <Board@iccsd.k12.ia.us> Cc: "Administrators ESC" <AdministratorsESC@iccsd.k12.ia.us> Subject: certified enrollment Good Afternoon, Please see the attached certified enrollment summary (with a big thanks to Kim for logging in and putting it together!). Please let me know if you have any questions. If not, I will plan to forward to members of the general public who have requested this information. Steve
Stephen F. Murley Superintendent of Schools Iowa City Community School District 1725 North Dodge Street Iowa City, IA 52245-9589 Phone: 319-688-1000 Fax: 319-688-1009 Web: http://www.iowacityschools.org Community Engagement: http://www.engageiowacityschools.org [cid:image003.jpg@01CDCCA6.CF7FF780]
142
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, November 17, 2012 6:37 PM Board Stephen Murley; council@iowa-city.org 12 years ago ICCSD_Long_Range_Planning_Process_and_Parameters_1.pdf
Dear Board Members, Attached below is an interesting document that is worthy of your thoughtful consideration. It is entitled "ICCSD Long Range Planning Process and Parameters". It was written by the district in 2000, but could have been written yesterday. Then as now, the ICCSD buildings were unevenly utilized. Then as now, the FRL was unevenly distributed. A desire is expressed in the document to correct these things and to "maintain an equivalency of educational opportunity between buildings". All of these were lovely sentiments then, as they are now. But none of this was done in the past 12 years. The disparities in the ICCSD are much worse today than they were then. What binding legal assurances can the board offer the community that the revenue purpose statement currently under consideration won't suffer the same fate as this poor forgotten document? Regards, Ed
143
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Saturday, November 17, 2012 11:39 AM Stephen Murley Board; Kim Colvin Re: Enrollment Figures
Hi Steve, This is insufficient detail for my purposes. I think that the community may need to step back from any major decision making until accurate numbers are available for all to consider. Regards, Ed
On Nov 17, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: > Good Morning Ed, > > Given the difficulty that the District has experienced in the past > when several sets of "unofficial numbers" have been released in > advance of the state certified enrollment determination, we are not > releasing unofficial numbers in advance of the completion of the state > process. I can share with you that our initial analysis indicates > that overall the District grew by over 300 students from our certified > enrollment last year. > > Steve > > On Nov 17, 2012, at 10:58 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> May I have some "uncertified figures" to work with while we wait for >> the certified ones? I don't see how the community can respond >> meaningfully to the various proposals that are aggressively being put >> forward when only one side of the discussion has access to the >> current enrollment numbers. >> >> Regards, >> >> Ed >> >> >> On Nov 17, 2012, at 10:33 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: >> >>> Good Morning Ed, >>> >>> Unfortunately the state has still not certified our enrollment.
144
>>> They have assured us that they are working on this and should be >>> done soon. Due to this delay we have moved our annual enrollment >>> report back to the December 4 Board meeting in the hope that they >>> will have completed their work by that time. >>> >>> Steve >>> >>> On Nov 17, 2012, at 10:21 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Steve, >>>> >>>> It has been 17 days since my last request for the enrollment >>>> figures. >>>> >>>> Do you have them yet? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Ed >>>> >>>> >>>> On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Stephen Murley wrote: >>>> >>>>> Greetings Ed >>>>> >>>>> We received the following from the state today: >>>>> >>>>> "Sorry Kim, but due to the overwhelming number of mistakes that >>>>> were not caught during the test period in September, and the >>>>> inability to catch them between Oct 8 and Oct 15 due to all >>>>> districts data not being made available we are still working on >>>>> them. Im sure an email will be going out when the numbers can be >>>>> deemed official. >>>>> Were hoping by the end of the week." >>>>> >>>>> We hope to have this information soon. We appreciate your >>>>> patience as we work with the DE. >>>>> >>>>> Steve >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Nov 1, 2012, at 7:34 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Steve, >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you have the certified figures? >>>>>> >>>>>> Ed >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Good Morning Ed
145
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> We will have our certified numbers from the state by the end of >>>>>>> the month. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Steve >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:14 AM, "Edwin Stone" >>>>>>> <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Steve, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When can I get a copy of the newest ICCSD enrollment figures? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ed >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts >>>>>>>> email server are archived in accordance with District policy >>>>>>>> and procedures. This email communication, including >>>>>>>> attachments, contains information which may be confidential >>>>>>>> and/or legally privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from >>>>>>>> disclosure under applicable law. The information is intended >>>>>>>> solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the >>>>>>>> intended recipient or believe you received this communication >>>>>>>> in error, please reply to the sender indicating that fact and >>>>>>>> delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not the >>>>>>>> intended recipient or believe you received this communication >>>>>>>> in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, >>>>>>>> distribution, or other use of the information is strictly >>>>>>>> prohibited. Thank you. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe >>>>>> you received this communication in error, please reply to the >>>>>> sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In >>>>>> addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>>>> received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, >>>>>> copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the >>>>>> information is strictly prohibited. Thank you. >>>> >>>> >>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under
146
>>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>> received this communication in error, please reply to the sender >>>> indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, >>>> if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >>>> communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, >>>> disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is >>>> strictly prohibited. Thank you. >> >> >> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains >> information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and >> may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The >> information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you >> are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >> communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that >> fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not >> the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in >> error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, >> or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
147
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Stephen Murley Saturday, November 17, 2012 11:33 AM Edwin Stone Stephen Murley; Board; Kim Colvin Re: Enrollment Figures
Good Morning Ed, Given the difficulty that the District has experienced in the past when several sets of "unofficial numbers" have been released in advance of the state certified enrollment determination, we are not releasing unofficial numbers in advance of the completion of the state process. I can share with you that our initial analysis indicates that overall the District grew by over 300 students from our certified enrollment last year. Steve On Nov 17, 2012, at 10:58 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote: > May I have some "uncertified figures" to work with while we wait for > the certified ones? I don't see how the community can respond > meaningfully to the various proposals that are aggressively being put > forward when only one side of the discussion has access to the current > enrollment numbers. > > Regards, > > Ed > > > On Nov 17, 2012, at 10:33 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: > >> Good Morning Ed, >> >> Unfortunately the state has still not certified our enrollment. >> They have assured us that they are working on this and should be done >> soon. Due to this delay we have moved our annual enrollment report >> back to the December 4 Board meeting in the hope that they will have >> completed their work by that time. >> >> Steve >> >> On Nov 17, 2012, at 10:21 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Steve, >>> >>> It has been 17 days since my last request for the enrollment figures. >>> >>> Do you have them yet? >>> >>> Regards, >>>
148
>>> Ed >>> >>> >>> On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Stephen Murley wrote: >>> >>>> Greetings Ed >>>> >>>> We received the following from the state today: >>>> >>>> "Sorry Kim, but due to the overwhelming number of mistakes that >>>> were not caught during the test period in September, and the >>>> inability to catch them between Oct 8 and Oct 15 due to all >>>> districts data not being made available we are still working on >>>> them. Im sure an email will be going out when the numbers can be deemed official. >>>> Were hoping by the end of the week." >>>> >>>> We hope to have this information soon. We appreciate your patience >>>> as we work with the DE. >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Nov 1, 2012, at 7:34 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Steve, >>>>> >>>>> Do you have the certified figures? >>>>> >>>>> Ed >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Good Morning Ed >>>>>> >>>>>> We will have our certified numbers from the state by the end of >>>>>> the month. >>>>>> >>>>>> Steve >>>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:14 AM, "Edwin Stone" >>>>>> <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Steve, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When can I get a copy of the newest ICCSD enrollment figures? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ed >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>
149
>>>>>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts >>>>>>> email server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>>>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>>>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>>>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>>>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use >>>>>>> of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or >>>>>>> believe you received this communication in error, please reply >>>>>>> to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you >>>>>>> received. In addition, if you are not the intended recipient or >>>>>>> believe you received this communication in error, any >>>>>>> unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, or >>>>>>> other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe >>>>> you received this communication in error, please reply to the >>>>> sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In >>>>> addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>>> received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, >>>>> copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information >>>>> is strictly prohibited. Thank you. >>> >>> >>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>> received this communication in error, please reply to the sender >>> indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, >>> if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >>> communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, >>> disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is >>> strictly prohibited. Thank you. > > > NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email server are archived in accordance with District policy and procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
150
Chace Ramey
May I have some "uncertified figures" to work with while we wait for the certified ones? I don't see how the community can respond meaningfully to the various proposals that are aggressively being put forward when only one side of the discussion has access to the current enrollment numbers. Regards, Ed
On Nov 17, 2012, at 10:33 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: > Good Morning Ed, > > Unfortunately the state has still not certified our enrollment. > They have assured us that they are working on this and should be done > soon. Due to this delay we have moved our annual enrollment report > back to the December 4 Board meeting in the hope that they will have > completed their work by that time. > > Steve > > On Nov 17, 2012, at 10:21 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Steve, >> >> It has been 17 days since my last request for the enrollment figures. >> >> Do you have them yet? >> >> Regards, >> >> Ed >> >> >> On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Stephen Murley wrote: >> >>> Greetings Ed >>> >>> We received the following from the state today: >>> >>> "Sorry Kim, but due to the overwhelming number of mistakes that were >>> not caught during the test period in September, and the inability to >>> catch them between Oct 8 and Oct 15 due to all districts data not >>> being made available we are still working on them. Im sure an
151
>>> email will be going out when the numbers can be deemed official. >>> Were hoping by the end of the week." >>> >>> We hope to have this information soon. We appreciate your patience >>> as we work with the DE. >>> >>> Steve >>> >>> >>> >>> On Nov 1, 2012, at 7:34 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Steve, >>>> >>>> Do you have the certified figures? >>>> >>>> Ed >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: >>>> >>>>> Good Morning Ed >>>>> >>>>> We will have our certified numbers from the state by the end of >>>>> the month. >>>>> >>>>> Steve >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:14 AM, "Edwin Stone" >>>>> <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Steve, >>>>>> >>>>>> When can I get a copy of the newest ICCSD enrollment figures? >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Ed >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe >>>>>> you received this communication in error, please reply to the >>>>>> sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In >>>>>> addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>>>> received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, >>>>>> copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the >>>>>> information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
152
>>>> >>>> >>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>> received this communication in error, please reply to the sender >>>> indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, >>>> if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >>>> communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, >>>> disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is >>>> strictly prohibited. Thank you. >> >> >> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains >> information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and >> may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The >> information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you >> are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >> communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that >> fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not >> the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in >> error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, >> or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
153
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Stephen Murley Saturday, November 17, 2012 10:33 AM Edwin Stone Board; Kim Colvin Re: Enrollment Figures
Good Morning Ed, Unfortunately the state has still not certified our enrollment. They have assured us that they are working on this and should be done soon. Due to this delay we have moved our annual enrollment report back to the December 4 Board meeting in the hope that they will have completed their work by that time. Steve On Nov 17, 2012, at 10:21 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Steve, > > It has been 17 days since my last request for the enrollment figures. > > Do you have them yet? > > Regards, > > Ed > > > On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Stephen Murley wrote: > >> Greetings Ed >> >> We received the following from the state today: >> >> "Sorry Kim, but due to the overwhelming number of mistakes that were >> not caught during the test period in September, and the inability to >> catch them between Oct 8 and Oct 15 due to all districts data not >> being made available we are still working on them. Im sure an >> email will be going out when the numbers can be deemed official. >> Were hoping by the end of the week." >> >> We hope to have this information soon. We appreciate your patience >> as we work with the DE. >> >> Steve >> >> >> >> On Nov 1, 2012, at 7:34 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Steve,
154
>>> >>> Do you have the certified figures? >>> >>> Ed >>> >>> >>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: >>> >>>> Good Morning Ed >>>> >>>> We will have our certified numbers from the state by the end of the >>>> month. >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> >>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:14 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Steve, >>>>> >>>>> When can I get a copy of the newest ICCSD enrollment figures? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Ed >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe >>>>> you received this communication in error, please reply to the >>>>> sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In >>>>> addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>>> received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, >>>>> copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information >>>>> is strictly prohibited. Thank you. >>> >>> >>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>> received this communication in error, please reply to the sender >>> indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, >>> if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >>> communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, >>> disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is >>> strictly prohibited. Thank you.
155
> > > NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email server are archived in accordance with District policy and procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
156
Chace Ramey
Hi Steve, It has been 17 days since my last request for the enrollment figures. Do you have them yet? Regards, Ed
On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Stephen Murley wrote: > Greetings Ed > > We received the following from the state today: > > "Sorry Kim, but due to the overwhelming number of mistakes that were > not caught during the test period in September, and the inability to > catch them between Oct 8 and Oct 15 due to all districts data not > being made available we are still working on them. Im sure an > email will be going out when the numbers can be deemed official. > Were hoping by the end of the week." > > We hope to have this information soon. We appreciate your patience as > we work with the DE. > > Steve > > > > On Nov 1, 2012, at 7:34 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Steve, >> >> Do you have the certified figures? >> >> Ed >> >> >> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: >> >>> Good Morning Ed >>>
157
>>> We will have our certified numbers from the state by the end of the >>> month. >>> >>> Steve >>> >>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:14 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Steve, >>>> >>>> When can I get a copy of the newest ICCSD enrollment figures? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Ed >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>> received this communication in error, please reply to the sender >>>> indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, >>>> if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >>>> communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, >>>> disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is >>>> strictly prohibited. Thank you. >> >> >> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains >> information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and >> may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The >> information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you >> are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >> communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that >> fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not >> the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in >> error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, >> or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
158
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Bryan Clemons <ginnyandbryan@gmail.com> Saturday, November 03, 2012 4:13 PM Ruppert, Rick; Ryan, Penni; Sagen, Maile; Schantz, Sandy; Schnack, Pat & Ron; Schultz, Melissa; Scott, Winnie; Shepardson, Marty; Sherburne, Alan; Sherburne, Nancy; Sindt, Krissa; Sisley, Barb; Smith, Stephanie; Snakenberg, Myrna; Soderberg, Sue; Stang, Sharon Kay; Stensvaag, Nancy; Stevenson, Dick; Still, David; Stone, Edwin; Stunz, Laura; Stutsman, Ron & Virginia; Summerwill, Kristin; Summy, Suzie Oliver; Swenson, JoAnne; Tellez, Rachel; Thayer, Keith; Vicki Thomae; Traw, AK and Chuck; Traw, Charles; Traw, Kelly; Walker, Jerry; Wallace, Kathryn; Wallace, Pete; Walton, Richard; Weaver, Willie; Weirich, Evelyn; Wells, Darin; West, Victoria; Whitesell, Alex; Wilder, David; Willard, Derek; Willard, Pamela; Williams, Nancy; Wolken, Sue and Steve; Wunder, Marcia; Yanchick, Donna; Yanchick, Vic new e-mail address
Subject:
Dear "contacts", We have changed our e-mail address. Please change from our aol address to:
ginnyandbryan@gmail.com
Many thanks, Ginny and Bryan Clemons
159
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Stephen Murley Thursday, November 01, 2012 2:51 PM Edwin Stone Board Re: Enrollment Figures
Good Afternoon Ed, This is part of the on-going discussion at the Board Facilities Committee work. Steve
On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:43 PM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote: > Steve, > > Who will formulate the long term plan you speak of and when will it be > available to the public? > > Ed > > On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:13 PM, Stephen Murley wrote: > >> Greetings Ed, >> >> I am opposed to any boundary changes until we have a long term plan >> that would allow me to provide answers about the impact of future >> boundary changes. >> >> Steve >> >> >> >> On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:09 PM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks for the update, Steve. >>> >>> I have a related question. I have heard from a usually reliable >>> source that you are now opposed to any boundary changes at the high >>> school level before a 3rd high school is built. Is this true? >>> >>> Ed >>> >>> >>> On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Stephen Murley wrote: >>> >>>> Greetings Ed >>>>
160
>>>> We received the following from the state today: >>>> >>>> "Sorry Kim, but due to the overwhelming number of mistakes that >>>> were not caught during the test period in September, and the >>>> inability to catch them between Oct 8 and Oct 15 due to all >>>> districts data not being made available we are still working on >>>> them. Im sure an email will be going out when the numbers can be deemed official. >>>> Were hoping by the end of the week." >>>> >>>> We hope to have this information soon. We appreciate your patience >>>> as we work with the DE. >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Nov 1, 2012, at 7:34 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Steve, >>>>> >>>>> Do you have the certified figures? >>>>> >>>>> Ed >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Good Morning Ed >>>>>> >>>>>> We will have our certified numbers from the state by the end of >>>>>> the month. >>>>>> >>>>>> Steve >>>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:14 AM, "Edwin Stone" >>>>>> <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Steve, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When can I get a copy of the newest ICCSD enrollment figures? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ed >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts >>>>>>> email server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>>>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>>>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>>>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>>>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use >>>>>>> of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or
161
>>>>>>> believe you received this communication in error, please reply >>>>>>> to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you >>>>>>> received. In addition, if you are not the intended recipient or >>>>>>> believe you received this communication in error, any >>>>>>> unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, or >>>>>>> other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe >>>>> you received this communication in error, please reply to the >>>>> sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In >>>>> addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>>> received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, >>>>> copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information >>>>> is strictly prohibited. Thank you. >>> >>> >>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>> received this communication in error, please reply to the sender >>> indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, >>> if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >>> communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, >>> disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is >>> strictly prohibited. Thank you. > > > NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email server are archived in accordance with District policy and procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
162
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Thursday, November 01, 2012 2:44 PM Stephen Murley Board Re: Enrollment Figures
Steve, Who will formulate the long term plan you speak of and when will it be available to the public? Ed On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:13 PM, Stephen Murley wrote: > Greetings Ed, > > I am opposed to any boundary changes until we have a long term plan > that would allow me to provide answers about the impact of future > boundary changes. > > Steve > > > > On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:09 PM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Thanks for the update, Steve. >> >> I have a related question. I have heard from a usually reliable >> source that you are now opposed to any boundary changes at the high >> school level before a 3rd high school is built. Is this true? >> >> Ed >> >> >> On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Stephen Murley wrote: >> >>> Greetings Ed >>> >>> We received the following from the state today: >>> >>> "Sorry Kim, but due to the overwhelming number of mistakes that were >>> not caught during the test period in September, and the inability to >>> catch them between Oct 8 and Oct 15 due to all districts data not >>> being made available we are still working on them. Im sure an >>> email will be going out when the numbers can be deemed official. >>> Were hoping by the end of the week." >>> >>> We hope to have this information soon. We appreciate your patience >>> as we work with the DE.
163
>>> >>> Steve >>> >>> >>> >>> On Nov 1, 2012, at 7:34 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Steve, >>>> >>>> Do you have the certified figures? >>>> >>>> Ed >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: >>>> >>>>> Good Morning Ed >>>>> >>>>> We will have our certified numbers from the state by the end of >>>>> the month. >>>>> >>>>> Steve >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:14 AM, "Edwin Stone" >>>>> <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Steve, >>>>>> >>>>>> When can I get a copy of the newest ICCSD enrollment figures? >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Ed >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe >>>>>> you received this communication in error, please reply to the >>>>>> sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In >>>>>> addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>>>> received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, >>>>>> copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the >>>>>> information is strictly prohibited. Thank you. >>>> >>>> >>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments,
164
>>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>> received this communication in error, please reply to the sender >>>> indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, >>>> if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >>>> communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, >>>> disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is >>>> strictly prohibited. Thank you. >> >> >> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains >> information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and >> may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The >> information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you >> are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >> communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that >> fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not >> the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in >> error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, >> or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
165
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Stephen Murley Thursday, November 01, 2012 2:14 PM Edwin Stone Board Re: Enrollment Figures
Greetings Ed, I am opposed to any boundary changes until we have a long term plan that would allow me to provide answers about the impact of future boundary changes. Steve
On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:09 PM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for the update, Steve. > > I have a related question. I have heard from a usually reliable > source that you are now opposed to any boundary changes at the high > school level before a 3rd high school is built. Is this true? > > Ed > > > On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Stephen Murley wrote: > >> Greetings Ed >> >> We received the following from the state today: >> >> "Sorry Kim, but due to the overwhelming number of mistakes that were >> not caught during the test period in September, and the inability to >> catch them between Oct 8 and Oct 15 due to all districts data not >> being made available we are still working on them. Im sure an >> email will be going out when the numbers can be deemed official. >> Were hoping by the end of the week." >> >> We hope to have this information soon. We appreciate your patience >> as we work with the DE. >> >> Steve >> >> >> >> On Nov 1, 2012, at 7:34 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Steve, >>>
166
>>> Do you have the certified figures? >>> >>> Ed >>> >>> >>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: >>> >>>> Good Morning Ed >>>> >>>> We will have our certified numbers from the state by the end of the >>>> month. >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> >>>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:14 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Steve, >>>>> >>>>> When can I get a copy of the newest ICCSD enrollment figures? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Ed >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe >>>>> you received this communication in error, please reply to the >>>>> sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In >>>>> addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>>> received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, >>>>> copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information >>>>> is strictly prohibited. Thank you. >>> >>> >>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>> received this communication in error, please reply to the sender >>> indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, >>> if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >>> communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, >>> disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is >>> strictly prohibited. Thank you. >
167
> > NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email server are archived in accordance with District policy and procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
168
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Thursday, November 01, 2012 2:10 PM Stephen Murley Board Re: Enrollment Figures
Thanks for the update, Steve. I have a related question. I have heard from a usually reliable source that you are now opposed to any boundary changes at the high school level before a 3rd high school is built. Is this true? Ed
On Nov 1, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Stephen Murley wrote: > Greetings Ed > > We received the following from the state today: > > "Sorry Kim, but due to the overwhelming number of mistakes that were > not caught during the test period in September, and the inability to > catch them between Oct 8 and Oct 15 due to all districts data not > being made available we are still working on them. Im sure an > email will be going out when the numbers can be deemed official. > Were hoping by the end of the week." > > We hope to have this information soon. We appreciate your patience as > we work with the DE. > > Steve > > > > On Nov 1, 2012, at 7:34 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Steve, >> >> Do you have the certified figures? >> >> Ed >> >> >> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: >> >>> Good Morning Ed >>> >>> We will have our certified numbers from the state by the end of the >>> month. >>>
169
>>> Steve >>> >>> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:14 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Steve, >>>> >>>> When can I get a copy of the newest ICCSD enrollment figures? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Ed >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>>> received this communication in error, please reply to the sender >>>> indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, >>>> if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >>>> communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, >>>> disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is >>>> strictly prohibited. Thank you. >> >> >> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains >> information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and >> may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The >> information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you >> are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >> communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that >> fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not >> the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in >> error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, >> or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
170
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Stephen Murley Thursday, November 01, 2012 2:04 PM Edwin Stone Board; Kim Colvin Re: Enrollment Figures
Greetings Ed We received the following from the state today: "Sorry Kim, but due to the overwhelming number of mistakes that were not caught during the test period in September, and the inability to catch them between Oct 8 and Oct 15 due to all districts data not being made available we are still working on them. Im sure an email will be going out when the numbers can be deemed official. Were hoping by the end of the week." We hope to have this information soon. We appreciate your patience as we work with the DE. Steve
On Nov 1, 2012, at 7:34 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Steve, > > Do you have the certified figures? > > Ed > > > On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: > >> Good Morning Ed >> >> We will have our certified numbers from the state by the end of the >> month. >> >> Steve >> >> On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:14 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Steve, >>> >>> When can I get a copy of the newest ICCSD enrollment figures? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Ed >>> >>>
171
>>> >>> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >>> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >>> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, >>> contains information which may be confidential and/or legally >>> privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under >>> applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of >>> the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you >>> received this communication in error, please reply to the sender >>> indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, >>> if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >>> communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, >>> disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is >>> strictly prohibited. Thank you. > > > NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email server are archived in accordance with District policy and procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
172
Chace Ramey
From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Edwin Stone <stone.edwin@gmail.com> Thursday, November 01, 2012 7:34 AM Stephen Murley Board Re: Enrollment Figures
Hi Steve, Do you have the certified figures? Ed
On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:16 AM, Stephen Murley wrote: > Good Morning Ed > > We will have our certified numbers from the state by the end of the > month. > > Steve > > On Oct 21, 2012, at 11:14 AM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Steve, >> >> When can I get a copy of the newest ICCSD enrollment figures? >> >> Regards, >> >> Ed >> >> >> >> NOTICE: All email communications to and from the Districts email >> server are archived in accordance with District policy and >> procedures. This email communication, including attachments, contains >> information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged, and >> may otherwise be exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The >> information is intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you >> are not the intended recipient or believe you received this >> communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that >> fact and delete the copy you received. In addition, if you are not >> the intended recipient or believe you received this communication in >> error, any unauthorized retention, copying, disclosure, distribution, >> or other use of the information is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
173

E Stone Emails Nov Dec

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

E Stone Emails Nov Dec

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chace Ramey

Any suggestions for mine or is it "good to go"? Ed

Great response, Sarah. Regards, Ed

Begin forwarded message:

Begin forwarded message:

What time is best for you? Regards, Ed

On Dec 26, 2012, at 9:40 AM, Stephen Murley wrote:

On Dec 26, 2012, at 9:40 AM, Stephen Murley wrote:

GoodMorningDr.Stone, Thankyouforforwardingthemessageandforyourthoughtsregardingthecontent.Ididnotreceivethisemailpriorto yourforward.Iwillworkwithouradministrativeteamtoaddressthecontentandprocess. Steve

On Dec 7, 2012, at 4:19 PM, John Bacon wrote:

bee YOOO tee full

give a call, one of you. ________________________________ From: Edwin Stone [stone.edwin@gmail.com]

bee YOOO tee full

Sarah, My suggestions attached. Ed

> > > > > <PoliyDraftThree12.11.docx>

Is Jeff drafting something? Ed

That works. See you tomorrow at noon? Jeffrey K. McGinness

Shall we have lunch at Mondo's again? Ed

I am open as well. Pick a time and location. Jeffrey K. McGinness

Great. When and where would you like to do do? Regards, Ed

Tomorrow would be better for me. My schedule tomorrow is flexible. Regards, Ed

Would you like to get together this weekend? Ed

Would you like to meet? Ed

What is your schedule like this weekend? Ed

On Dec 5, 2012, at 2:34 PM, Sarah Swisher wrote:

On Dec 2, 2012, at 10:19 PM, "Edwin Stone" <stone.edwin@gmail.com> wrote:

On Nov 28, 2012, at 9:13 PM, Stephen Murley wrote:

GoodEveningEd, TheenrollmentreportwillbeappendedtotheBoardAgendaandpostedtomorrow.Ihaveprovidedacopyforyouso thatyoudonothavetogothroughtheagendatofindanddownloadthedocument. Steve

Hi Steve, Do you have the certified figures? Ed

You might also like