TEXT_SIZE
Please update your Flash Player to view content.

MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approved

Laura Beaton
Staff Writer
7/18/2012

When Plumas Unified School District held its regular board meeting July 11 in Quincy, the big issue of the night was the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between PUSD and Plumas Charter School (PCS), which the board eventually approved.

The public had lots to say on this matter. Three speakers spoke in favor of the MOU, which specifies the terms under which Greenville High School (GHS) and PCS grades seven – 12 will share space, teachers and resources.

Supporters believe that by joining forces, students will have more options for classes. They believe this one-year pilot program will pave the way for future collaboration that will only benefit cash-strapped districts.

PUSD board president Chris Russell read a letter written by Jonathan Kusel, who could not be present to make his comments.

Kusel’s letter requested tabling the MOU so that there could be a public hearing. He does not support the approval of the MOU at this time and asked that director Bret Cook, who has children attending PCS as well as Greenville schools, abstain from voting because of a conflict of interest.

The second request Kusel made was to have a group familiar with Plumas County do the search and hiring of the new superintendent for Plumas County and PUSD, rather than the out-of-town firm the board selected.

Both requests were rejected. Cook spoke eloquently about his duty to serve as trustee for constituents and was confident in supporting the MOU, which was recommended by the 7-11 committee that met for months researching possible solutions to the district’s budget shortfalls and other school issues.

Board members voiced their concerns over some of the language of the MOU, which is available for public viewing at PUSD offices during business hours.

Concerns about PCTA regulations and possible grievance issues were also voiced. Terry Oestreich reported that its members had agreed to the MOU.

Concerns that the board would not have oversight were also voiced and allayed; it is already inherent in the board’s structure that it has oversight.

Sue Weber, director of Indian Valley Academy (IVA), which operates under the umbrella of PCS, is a key player in crafting the MOU.

Weber stressed the importance of the quarterly review process.

A joint committee composed of administrators, teachers, students and parents of PCS and PUSD would monitor, assess, reflect and revise the MOU as needed.

She suggested the addition of PCTA and CTA representatives. Weber said that the more key players at the table, the more consistency and strength the pilot program would have.

Weber also answered questions regarding the criteria PCS uses for its elective teachers, community members not necessarily possessing teaching credentials.

Weber gave assurances that all teachers were qualified and had credentials of some sort that gave them the teaching skills required to teach their respective courses.

PCS potential elective courses include welding, small engine repair, art, Native American studies, ballroom dancing, fencing/martial arts and choir/drum line.

GHS elective courses include culinary arts, natural resources, business and band.

Elective courses will be offered to students from both schools, pending administrator approval.

PCS students will be able to participate in school sports.

Self-proclaimed “rabble rouser” Mark Mihevc, of Graeagle, was opposed to the MOU. He compared PCS to the grand lottery winner, and asked, “If charter schools are so awesome, why are they so dependent on the district?”

After nearly an hour of discussion, a motion was made to approve the amended MOU and was passed unanimously. Board Director Sonja Anderson was absent.

 

Public comment

There were two comments during the public input period alleging harsh teaching conditions and negative atmosphere created by Portola’s elementary school principal.

An increased workload, burdensome observations and evaluations of teachers, and 50- to 60-hour workweeks have left an experienced 35-year teacher disheartened and pleading for help.

A second comment was made that spoke to the many inexperienced principals PUSD has hired that lead to micromanaging, low morale, poor communication and students suffering from lack of leadership and curriculum.

“Teachers should not be victims of inexperience,” said Faith Strailey, retired grievance officer and past president of Plumas County Teachers Association.

Speakers believed that inexperienced principals felt the pressure of having to prove themselves to the school board, which led to behaviors that create a negative environment.

 

Closed session

The board met in closed session to discuss two issues: the appeal of complaint resolution, and the superintendent position.

After about one hour, the meeting resumed with Russell’s statement: “Nothing to report.”

Future agenda items include renaming Greenville Elementary School, naming Greenville’s gym, the superintendent search report and the usual department reports including the ever-changing and concerning budget.

If statewide tax initiatives don’t pass in November, schools are looking at receiving less money, requiring more reserve funds to be spent.

The next regular meeting of the PUSD board of directors is scheduled for Aug. 8.

 

Comments  

 
-4#1RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedMark Mihevc2012-07-18 05:47
What Plumas News doesn't report is that Plumas Charter graduated 34 students and now their enrollment is way down.

They need more revenue that we call students. By moving into GHS, it is easier for them to take over Indian Valley.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-1#2RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedMark Mihevc2012-07-18 05:52
While they take over IV, the Board will fire PUSD teachers and take students away from PUSD.

With limited funding, Plumas Charter and the Board will effectively end PUSD.

The Board and Plumas Charter are suffocating the real public education system.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
+4#3RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedRealist2012-07-18 09:29
Hey Mark,

Where is the money supposed to come from? Are you stepping up with a big check?
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-5#4RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedJon Kennedy2012-07-18 10:28
Hey "Realist". Mark Mihevc is the last person you want to ask about where the money is coming from. He understands as well, if not better, than anyone, how much CASH the School District has. It's actually quite disgusting. Money is not the current problem.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
+6#5RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedRealist2012-07-18 12:50
Ok Jon Kennedy,

Please summarize what in your opinion the "current problem" is, if there are not enough students in IV to run a proper school what should the taxpayers be forced to do?
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-10#6RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedJon Kennedy2012-07-18 17:39
Realist: Prioritizing is the main problem. PUSD is a school district for the ENTIRE County. It is not prudent to separate the communities and "do the math" individually. The Board and taxpayers have a fiduciary obligation to educate EVERY student regardless of their address...cont.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-8#7RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedJon Kennedy2012-07-18 18:17
...I am not advocating for or against Charter, I am simply trying to summarize the "problems". PUSD AND PCOE have plenty of cash reserves. Although you will regularly hear weak arguments for not being able to spend the reserves, but they have an estimated 17 million in CASH available...cont...
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-9#8RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedJon Kennedy2012-07-18 18:23
...not counting other amounts stashed away in various funds for "other" activities. Enough summarizing. Hopefully the Board will properly prioritize expenditures going forward and will try harder for PUSD to survive. Unfortunately the IV CMNTY was dealt a [censored]py hand by Glenn and others.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
+6#9RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedLocal2012-07-18 19:54
The status quo, declining enrollment was leading to the end of PUSD along with its current reserve accounting. We need to wake up and realize that rural education, as experienced and remembered over the past 50 years, is for the most part, dead. The MOU is a step to dealing with this reality.....
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-4#10RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedMark Mihevc2012-07-18 20:12
Oh for heavens sake.You don't even know that charter schools are 'funded' from Plumas County prop taxes and state ADA - just like PUSD? Prime reason we need our real schools to continue...
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
+5#11RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedLocal2012-07-18 20:22
Jon, Mark, given unlimited hypothetical power over how the schools were run, what Would you change in the next 3 years that wiould stabilize the PUSD and make them the best schools in rural California, so good, people move their families here to attend these schools?
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-6#12RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedJon Kennedy2012-07-18 20:24
Mark beat me to it. The funding source is the same. PUSD needs to adjust to make things work. So does the State of California, but it is easier to take the path of least resistance instead.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-5#13RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedJon Kennedy2012-07-18 20:29
Local: I'll be happy to share some thoughts but this forum is frustrating due to the limited characters available per comment. is my email address. If you really care, like I do about the future of our schools. Please email me. You can share my thoughts as you wish.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
+2#14RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedRealist2012-07-18 21:34
Local Be careful identifying yourself to Jon Kennedy. County supers have a nasty habit of "making life hard" for those that oppose them.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-8#15RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedJon Kennedy2012-07-18 21:50
That's comical...Yeah "Local" you almost fell for my trap...That power I have as County Supervisor will surely reign down on you. Are you kidding me?
Just sitting here shaking my head at Miss/Mr Conspiracy theorist.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
+10#16RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedLocal2012-07-18 22:42
Is that a black helicopter I hear out my window...oh no....you found me Kennedy! LOL
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
+12#17RE:Localkyle2012-07-19 07:06
Quote:
people move their families here to attend these schools?

I may be naive, but more people move their families due to jobs than education opportunities. IMHO, until the job situation in Plumas Co improves, the schools are going to struggle with enrollment, not the other way around.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
0#18RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedRealist2012-07-19 08:43
Jon Kennedy,

Not claiming that you personally have excersized this power, but Supervisors in the past and present have, and there is nothing stopping you from reaching out and "making life hard" for someone.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-9#19RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedJon Kennedy2012-07-19 08:53
Nothing stopping me from "making life hard" for someone? Except for that being REALLY stupid. Clearly, whoever you are, you don't know me very well. No worries, I don't intend to stop working collectively with the schools, hospitals, fire departments, etc. to make our County a place worth living.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-7#20RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedJon Kennedy2012-07-19 08:55
Kyle, you are right. Retired people moving here typically don't worry about schools and families still needing to work care about jobs first. However, "how ore the schools?" is one of the next questions asked before making a move.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
+7#21RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedRealist2012-07-19 11:01
Now that Jon and I have agreed to disagree on his power to reach out and "make life hard". Let's get to the problem, Plumas County NEEDS more industry and jobs. MAKE IT EASY FOR INDUSTRY TO MOVE HERE! PROVIDE INCENTIVES! REDUCE REGULATIONS. How about some of that Jon?
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-6#22IndustryJon Kennedy2012-07-19 11:20
Industry? You mean like the industry in our back yard called lumber? Talk to the USFS and Enviro's about that one. But I'm not giving up on the fight. There is not a sign at the County limits that reads: NO NEW BUSINESSES! Can you cite one industry that would like to do business here?...cont...
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-9#23IndustryJon Kennedy2012-07-19 11:26
I'm just one Supervisor, but I'm up for talking to any company willing to create jobs in this county. We have potential for offering incentives on properties the county owns, our rules and regulations for doing business aren't so strict that it discourages new "industry"...cont...
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-8#24IndustryJon Kennedy2012-07-19 11:30
...if we're missing the boat and there's some industry staring right at us waiting to start up in Plumas County, let me know. I was born in Quincy 46 years ago. Parents also from here. The weather, proximity to major cities and highways, absence of natural gas and a few other things haven't changed
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-9#25IndustryJon Kennedy2012-07-19 11:33
...please tell me what can be done to encourage doing business here that would entice a company to pack up and head for the mountains. Our county is a great place to live and raise kids; it's safe for the most part. We need to encourage folks to move here that can earn income elsewhere...
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-8#26IndustryJon Kennedy2012-07-19 11:36
...I have more but I'm not playing this silly little game of limiting characters per response...Again, my email address is available for further discussion. And I don't own a black helicopter. ;-)
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
+4#27RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedRealist2012-07-20 08:08
Hey Jon,

You say, "talk to the USFS and Enviros". How about you show some leadership and talk to them? You are the publically elected supervisor, not I. You have political capital to call to the conversation, I have none. It's time you and the others step up and show some leadership.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-9#28RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedJon Kennedy2012-07-20 08:25
It wasn't a request for YOU to talk to the USFS. We are talking to them...I'm talking about bad decisions made the last 20 years, I've been in office for 18 months; I'm working on it. And if you're paying attention at all and don't realize I am showing some leadership...I don't know what to tell ya.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-2#29RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedMark Mihevc2012-07-20 08:42
Yesterday, the PUSD board voted to increase the bus pass fare by 25%. While PUSD does nothing to reduce expenses, like move out of Church st, the board decides to squeeze parents of students for an additional $7500 in revenue.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-1#30RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedMark Mihevc2012-07-20 08:46
Plumas county residents are hurting, yet Sonja Anderson disgustingly says 'we have to start somewhere'.

Really? By squeezing parents of a few more bucks? The other two members Bret Cook and the new member also disgustingly voted for the increase...

Where's the leadership here?
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-13#31RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedJon Kennedy2012-07-20 08:48
Hey Mark...I'm quite sure it is somehow the Plumas County Board of Supervisor's fault. I take full responsibility for the decisions others make.
Quote| Report to administrator
 
 
-2#32RE: MOU between PUSD and Plumas Charter approvedMark Mihevc2012-07-20 08:52
No, Mr. Kennedy, I distinctly saw and heard these three PUSD board members vote to extract an additional $7,500 from parents so that it can address their 'stated' $4m deficit...
Quote| Report to administrator
 

Add comment

Feather Publishing encourages civil discussion on news stories that are important to our community. We do ask that commenters follow certain rules of conduct. Keep your comments on the topic at hand. Threats, insults, lies, and inappropriate language are prohibited. Just as with our letters to the editor we want you to be accountable for your comments so we ask that you use your full real name. We reserve the right to delete any comments that do not comply with these rules of conduct. Commenters who repeatedly do not comply will be prohibited from posting further comments.
Comments are limited to 300 characters. If you would like to post a longer message, please submit a letter to the editor. Submit a letter to the editor. Letters to the editor are limited to a maximum of 300 words. Deadline for submittal is noon on Thursdays.


Move
-

Sports Headlines

Top Headline

Chester loses at championship

Chester loses at championship

Chester’s Hunter Morris dives for the catch at the Division V championship game in Chico on May 18. Photo by Kathy Morris James Wilson Sports Reporter 5/23/2013    ...

Read More...

Fishing Report for the week of 5/22/2013

Fishing Report for the week of 5/22/2013

Heath and Tori Farrell proudly display a twenty pound Mackinaw along with a two pound rainbow they caught on a recent family outing to Bucks Lake. Photo Submited Michael...

Read More...

California Outdoors for the week of 5/23/2013

Carrie Wilson California Department of Fish and Wildlife   Stowing gear     Question: I would like a definition of “stowed” in regard to fishing...

Read More...
Facebook Image
Local Events

Contact Us

up_contact

Visitors Guide
Yellow Page Directory
Yellow Pages

National Headlines

Dining Guide
 
Plumas County
Restaurant

 

Moving and Storage
Forest Stweardship
 
ForestStwd.gif
Help Wanted
Help Wanted

Help WantedClick to see current job opportunities

Advertise with us

LassenNews.com
"); pageTracker._trackPageview(); } catch(err) {}