Superintendent Isn’t a ‘Lame Duck’ in the Eyes of the GUSD
Principals and a Response to the Letter from the Dispatch Editorial
Board for Context
Superintendent Isn’t a ‘Lame Duck’ in the Eyes of the GUSD Principals and a Response to the Letter from the Dispatch Editorial Board for Context
Dear Editor,
As Gilroy Unified principals, we would like to collectively respond to your editorial regarding the search for a new superintendent. Many of us have had the good fortune to work under Edwin’s leadership and have been around long enough to remember the lack of leadership that preceded him. It will be extremely difficult to find someone to replace him who has the same commitment and compassion for this community, the vision to see ALL students succeed academically, and the ability to work so cooperatively with the diverse groups of employees who are employed in our district.
Although there is never a good time for a superintendent such as Edwin to move on, we all completely understand and accept the fact that he has made the hard decision to leave us mid-year. This is the unfortunate nature of public education. The school year time line does not always work in tune with the rest of the world. This job presents an excellent opportunity for someone like Edwin, who has proven himself to be a leader of high caliber.
Furthermore, none of us see Edwin as a “lame-duck.” The term “lame-duck” suggests that the leader referred to no longer has power in the eyes of those looking to him for direction. It implies that the leader is on the way out and that it may no longer be necessary to cooperate with them or follow their direction. This is not the way we feel about Edwin. We have too much respect for him to see him as a “lame-duck,” and we hope the public and the press would afford him the same respect as well.
As long as Edwin is still employed by Gilroy Unified, and probably well after he leaves, we will continue to look to him for direction. We will continue the initiatives Edwin worked so hard to put into place because we believe in them as well as in Edwin. We all want to see our students advance academically, regardless of who moves on from Gilroy Unified or who moves in to Gilroy Unified. Thanks to the processes put into place under Edwin’s leadership, student achievement will continue to guide all the work that we do.
Diane Elia on behalf of the principals of Gilroy Unified School District: Sal Tomasello, John Perales, Marilyn Ayala, Luis Carrillo, Paula Cornia, Velia Codiga, Jim Gama, Silvia Reyes, Barbara Keesaw, Maryann Boylan, Greg Kapaku, Maria Wetzel, Greg Camacho-Light, James Maxwell, Barbara Harris, Stefani Garino, Alma Quintana, Michael Hall, Joe DiSalvo, Mani Corzo
Editor’s note: The following letter from the newspaper’s editorial board was sent to the Gilroy Unified School District principals in response to the letter.
Dear GUSD Principals,
Your letter to the editor – without any dialogue – caught us by surprise.
In our editorial we praised Edwin for the significant progress he has made, and, moreover, did not dwell on the fact that he is breaking his contract to move to Pasadena. In addition, the editorial only lightly touched on the fact that he is leaving mid-year.
Lame duck is not a term used to describe someone doing a poor job. It is a historical term used to describe those who will not be in power over the long term, but are in the short term.
It’s a situational, factual description, and in truth was used in our editorial board discussion to put Edwin’s decision to leave the community mid-year in a positive light – i.e. “he decided to leave mid-year so that the district would not be in a long-term situation with a lame duck leader being better off with an interim person who could smooth the transition to the next superintendent.”
In a greater perspective, the editorial board has taken up a burning issue for this community and the school district – the critical lack of funding for school facilities as the city continues to approve more housing growth – and elevated the discussion to a level such that it is one of the most important issues on the local leadership agenda.
Where is the letter to the editor from the principals supporting the numerous recent editorials and focus on this critical issue?
To make an issue of the term lame duck in such a grand fashion as having a letter signed by all the principals in the district sent to the newspaper leaves us baffled.
We will, of course, publish it – with an editor’s note for context
Furthermore, if the principals would like to send a delegation to meet with the editorial board we would be happy to discuss the use of the term, or any other issue of community concern. We meet every Tuesday at 11am.
Mark Derry, editor, and Steve Staloch, publisher, on behalf of the Dispatch editorial board: Lisa Pampuch, Dina Campeau, Jane Howard, Robert Dillon, Jack Foley, Cynthia Walker and Rose Barry
Let’s Not Worry About the Decrepit Red Barn – Tear it Down and Move On
Dear Editor,
Yes it would be great to be able to keep the red barn there, but Ms. Connie Rogers it’s probably more than 100 years old and the city has no choice but to dismantle it.
Connie, are you going to pay for the lawsuit for the city when a child is injured or worse, killed?
I don’t think so.
There also was no reason for public input. It is a given that the barn is beyond repair.
If you want to start a fundraiser, please do it for something important like a homeless shelter, and not this red barn.
Chris Walling, San Jose
‘I Awoke in High Spirits Confident I Was a Good Republican …’
Dear Editor,
Thursday morning I awoke in high spirits confident I was a good Republican upholding my pledge to capitalism.
After all, I drive an SUV which costs only about $2,000 a month to fill up, and I’ll have to take out a second mortgage to cover Christmas. I will admit I recycle my cans and bottles but only because I enjoy collecting the extra money for a Starbucks – it has nothing to do with preserving the environment, I swear. By Thursday night, however, I was in the depths of great despair as I discovered from that day’s Letters to the Editor that I am (GASP) a socialist, a Marxist-Leninist socialist. Caltrain and Amtrak and Lite Rail, Oh My!
How can this be you ask?
I, sob, support public transportation. I am even willing to consider a tax increase for a more convenient, economical way of commuting around the Bay Area. I am so ashamed. Where could I have possibly been brainwashed by this notion? I confess, I have traveled to Europe several times in my life and even lived in Paris for awhile. During my stay in Paris, I enjoyed the convenience of traveling throughout the city and surrounding suburbs quickly and affordably via the Metro. In London, the experience was much the same.
Believe it or not, people were still allowed to own cars of their choice. Nobody had to give up their Mercedes for the poor peasant working in the field to use as a plow. Several years later, I was blessed to be working at a job that had the benefit of Caltrain right outside its door. It was wonderful to commute to work stress free. Yes, I know, providing efficient public transportation means Americans might have to support other Americans’ desire to avoid traffic congestion, fight smog and conserve oil. God forbid we help are fellow man much less society – that whole public education thing is such a nuisance.
I guess I am left to face the horrific reality that I am, gulp, un-American and be thankful that we are no longer hunting socialists but terrorists. At least my flight privileges should remain intact. BTW, if any of you out there are ever the least bit curious to try a more convenient way to commute by riding the rail, my advice: avoid the train marked 5,547 miles to Leningrad, and oh, mind the gap!
Sonia W. Vanya, Gilroy
The Golden Quill is awarded occasionally for a well-penned letter.
It’s a ‘No-Brainer’ – If Developers Won’t Pay for Schools, Start a Moratorium
Dear Editor,
There are only two ways to pay for the impact that new development has on our schools.
Either the developer pays for it, some out of profits and some passed on to the new homeowner, or the current residents of the city have to foot the bill.
It seems to me to be a
no-brainer. Since the developers can’t, or better said, won’t pay for their impact on the school system, the City Council should institute a building moratorium to include both market-rate homes and affordable homes. And they should do it NOW.
Mike Gilroy,
former mayor, City of Gilroy
