| Author | Post |
|---|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13th, 2007 09:05 pm |
|
RDG....I understand the point you are trying to make.....but we believe that lunch is not a school sanctioned "activity". It is the student's break from school. We also believe that it is the parents that retain the supervisory role when the student leaves the campus. Imagine if an accident were to happen to a student that (under this new policy) is allowed to leave for their internship or another class off site. The school is not directly supervising that student, nor is the school to be held liable for the accident. It is still the parents (and the student) that remain fully responsible for that student's actions.
Regarding smoking vs. off campus lunches, I really feel that this is not an apples to apples comparison. Lunch is not an activity that affects others negatively like second hand smoke. A better analogy would be a business that passed a policy requiring that all the employees were to remain on site for their 45 minute unpaid lunch break, all the while forcing them to stand in line for 30 of those minutes (because they didn't want to hire and pay for enough service staff) and then spend the other 15 minutes eating with 1000 other employees in a confined area. I don't think anyone would find that as a positive environment to work in.....or learn in.
Again...I am 100% for everyone having the choice to keep their own kid on campus if that's what they want......and I am 100% for everyone to have the choice not to as well. We are all different, we all have different lives. We should respect each others diversity, we should not want to control others just because we don't understand or can't comprehend their ways. That only teaches our kids intolerance. Joe Bernier
|
rdg7359
Member
| Joined: | Sun Feb 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 128 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 13th, 2007 05:10 pm |
|
Joe, Could it not be argued that if the school board were to allow children to leave campus at lunch they would not be able to fulfill their other obligations as it pertains to ARS 15-341, specifically, Section A #17? That states "The governing board shall: Provide for adequate supervision over pupils in instructional and non instructional activities by certificated or non certificated personnel." Does this not imply the child's safety?
Also, with reference to your 14th amendment argument. Before smoking in public places was banned by recent law, there were companies that banned smoking through policies. It is your right to smoke if you choose to do that, but why wasn't that an infringement of anyones 14th amendment rights? The point is, I believe you are confusing policies with laws. There are many policies that we all have to follow that are not against the law even though we may not agree them.
I can appreciate your view and I really can appreciate fighting for what you believe in. But these Statutes and Constitution issues you bring up are wide open to ones interpretation and are not as clear cut as you seem to believe them to be.
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12th, 2007 02:11 pm |
|
RDG.....the statute you are referring to states the board created policies must follow the law (sentence #1 after the A). My position on this has been if the parent allows the student to leave at lunch, the student should be allowed to leave. If one of the school staff tries to enforce this policy by physically stopping and holding the student on campus against their will, that person would be violating the law of unlawful incarceration. Also the Constitution is the law of the land.....this policy is inconsistent with Amendment 14....which grants liberty to of all of the citizens of the U.S. And yes....even students are citizens of this land, and are afforded these rights under the constitution....especially when granted to them by their parents permission.
Hope this helps.....Joe Bernier
|
rdg7359
Member
| Joined: | Sun Feb 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 128 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12th, 2007 11:38 am |
|
Joe,
Perhaps you can enlighten me as to what part of ARS 15-341 you keep referring to that you believe is being violated. I have read this statute and do not see where it states that anyones rights are being violated by a school board choosing to close a school campus.
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/15/00341.htm
This is a lengthy and drawn out statute, so if you could explain what part of this statute that you believe is being violated would be a help.
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 12th, 2007 01:39 am |
|
Joe - Where are we now in this crusade - are we down to Option D?
Joe Plan of Attack:
Option A : Ask a bunch of high school students to take a day off school and chant things.
Option B: Bore everyone at the board meetings to tears until everyone says: OKAY YOUR KIDS CAN EAT WHEREVER THEY WANT, PLEASE. NO MORE SPEECHES.
Option C: Have daughter write inappropriate email to board member - blame board member for picking on daughter, hope board member resigns. Joe becomes new board member.
Option D: Ask a bunch of high school students to take a day off school and chant things.
Option E : Hold our breath until our faces turn red.
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 05:19 pm |
|
| How funny, Gadfly apparently has so much venom built up inside that he/she had to spew it here on this blog again!
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 04:56 pm |
|
gadfly....you have a reading comprehension problem....I still can't find where I quote ARS 13-341 instead of ARS 15-341, I even acknowledge that if I did do that, it was a typo......and that if I did do that somewhere, I need to fix it. Please show me where I did that....or are you misquoting me again? Don't twist what I say around. Stop grasping at straws....Stop spinning half- truths about what I have stated. I never said Peoria was the first district to completely close it's campuses, for they still haven't done that. There are certain students that are allowed to leave. What I said was that Peoria was the first district to REMOVE PARENTAL PERMISSION!!! You need to comprehend what you read and stop putting your own twist on it. I can't find any district that had parental permission in place.....and then REMOVED IT!!!!
I never said the constitution specifically addresses and includes language of closed campuses. For all of us know that the Constitution applies to all situations that we live in. What I said was this new policy (removing parental permission) violates the liberties granted to us by the 14th amendment of the constitution. Again you are misquoting me and what I have written. (i.e. it doesn't state "except in a closed campus situation")
You continue to feebly attack what I have written and you can't even acknowledge that you have misread and misinterpreted the things I write about. I have done my research.....I hope that everyone double checks my facts. Then, everyone will see what I am looking at. I have discovered most of this information by double checking the closers statements and opinions.
Why do you continue to avoid actually answering my questions from before? Joe Bernier
Last edited on Thu Nov 8th, 2007 04:59 pm by Joewrites4rights
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 03:39 pm |
|
Wouldn't it be an earthshattering event if Joe decided to come out and be truthful and honest about all this? He decided to answer questions straight on. I know it will never happen, but let's just imagine for a moment....
Joe - you've put various posts on these blogs that seem to be without basis or any type of backup at all - care to comment?
- You're absolutely right, I don't have any sources to cite because I did very little research.
So the one cite you had of ARS 13-341? Any case law?
- Complete sham. For the longest time I had the wrong code section in there. It was actually 15-341 I guess I wanted to cite. It said something in there it couldn't be inconsistent with the laws of somebody so I immediately jumped to my own conclusion that closed campuses were against the law. Case law, no.
And the assertion that the Peoria School District was the first district in the nation to completely close campuses?
- First of all, you have to understand, I never thought anyone would actually call me on this. Logically, it doesn't make the least bit of sense, does it, that in the huge country that Peoria would be the first one to do this. Honestly, I did very little research on this and the research I did do was overwhelmingly negative to my position, so I just made it up.
And your assertions about closed campuses being contrary to the 14th Amendment?
- Wow, that was one of my best ones!! So you expect me to go to the verbage of the 14th Amendment and find something about closed campuses? I fully understand that courts interpret these things, so I would have to find some case law on it. Whether there was any case law on it, I really doubt, but I didn't really bother to look for it.
So you weren't the least bit concerned that someone would actually want you to cite your sources when you wrote these ridiculous things?
- I'm being honest here, this is a ridiculous issue I am fighting for and spending so much time on . For people to get so upset about kids eating in a cafeteria, my base is not the sharpest tool in the shed. Look at some of the posts from Concernedfor Peoria changed her name to IntegrityforPeoria and you will see what I mean.
What really concerns you about this whole thing?
- What really concerns me is what I read in the paper today. Voters are turning down bond overrides. I know it has a lot to do with property values, but I worry about the older couple up in Westbrook Village observing all of this BS and saying 'Wow, that school district is loaded with loonies. To spend all this time on lunch for the kiddies, aren't there more important issues than that? I think we'll have to do two no votes on the override'. Peoria's last override passed by the slimmest of margins - I warn you all - we'd better get our act together soon or the next override is not going to pass and this lunch thing will suddenly seem very trivial even to my supporters as teachers are let go and class sizes swell.
Thanks, you actually sounded coherent.
- I really feel so much better.
Last edited on Thu Nov 8th, 2007 10:57 pm by gadfly
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 07:07 am |
|
gadfly...I'm not playing games...I'll explain this to you.....it states " not inconsistant with law (insert a pause here if it helps) OR rules of the state board of education"..... you are reading it to say...."laws AND rules of the state board of education" .....the state board of education DOES NOT make laws....there are NO laws of the state board of education.....the reference to law is stating that the policies must follow the laws of the land. Constitutional law.... (for example: that is how policies that violate the first amendment get thrown out) Criminal law....(that's how policies that violate the criminal code...unlawful arrest....lack of due process...etc. get thrown out)
Do you see that now?  Don't call me names...your stooping to KK's level when you do that.....Joe Bernier
Last edited on Thu Nov 8th, 2007 07:15 am by Joewrites4rights
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:54 am |
|
You're playing games, Joe, why don't you just admit you made up a bunch of things with no research at all and we'll go on....You really are a fraud....
It says:
The governing board shall:
1. Prescribe and enforce policies and procedures for the governance of the schools, not inconsistent with law or rules prescribed by the state board of education.
My original question still applies -what law or rule prescibed by the state board of education has this closed campus rule broken?
Last edited on Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:55 am by gadfly
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:42 am |
|
| Gadfly...it must be late....I'm not following what you are commenting on. You posted ALL of 15-341.....why? It's right in the beginning like you posted before....board policies are to follow the law...like you said before....there is no 13-341....where did I post that? If I made a typo I need to change it...Anyway.... board policies are to follow the law..... Joe Bernier Last edited on Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:58 am by Joewrites4rights
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:37 am |
|
Joewrites4rights wrote: Gadfly...You are off on a tangent again.....my statement refers to the here and now....not what some district is going to do in 2010........
So, the first district I researched is the second district in the nation after Peoria is that right JoeLast edited on Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:41 am by gadfly
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:33 am |
|
Joewrites4rights wrote: You are leaving things out of your questions and comments. Follow what I wrote. I wrote how this policy violates a law, I did not cite any state board of education rules.
Joe - I was trying to help you as I really am somewhat embarrassed for you.
You said:
ARS 13-341 states that governing board policies must follow the laws
You also said:
ARS 15-341 states exactly what I wrote....word for word. Look it up
Well Joe I did look it up - show me where it says word for word. You're right I don't see it either. Fraud, fraud, fraud, fraud, fraud, you are a complete fraud
15-341. General powers and duties; immunity; delegation
A. The governing board shall:
1. Prescribe and enforce policies and procedures for the governance of the schools, not inconsistent with law or rules prescribed by the state board of education.
2. Maintain the schools established by it for the attendance of each pupil for a period of not less than one hundred seventy-five school days or two hundred school days, as applicable, or its equivalent as approved by the superintendent of public instruction for a school district operating on a year-round operation basis, to offer an educational program on the basis of a four day school week or to offer an alternative kindergarten program on the basis of a three day school week, in each school year, and if the funds of the district are sufficient, for a longer period, and as far as practicable with equal rights and privileges.
3. Exclude from schools all books, publications, papers or audiovisual materials of a sectarian, partisan or denominational character.
4. Manage and control the school property within its district.
5. Acquire school furniture, apparatus, equipment, library books and supplies for the use of the schools.
6. Prescribe the curricula and criteria for the promotion and graduation of pupils as provided in sections 15-701 and 15-701.01.
7. Furnish, repair and insure, at full insurable value, the school property of the district.
8. Construct school buildings on approval by a vote of the district electors.
9. Make in the name of the district conveyances of property belonging to the district and sold by the board.
10. Purchase school sites when authorized by a vote of the district at an election conducted as nearly as practicable in the same manner as the election provided in section 15-481 and held on a date prescribed in section 15-491, subsection E, but such authorization shall not necessarily specify the site to be purchased and such authorization shall not be necessary to exchange unimproved property as provided in section 15-342, paragraph 23.
11. Construct, improve and furnish buildings used for school purposes when such buildings or premises are leased from the national park service.
12. Purchase school sites or construct, improve and furnish school buildings from the proceeds of the sale of school property only on approval by a vote of the district electors.
13. Hold pupils to strict account for disorderly conduct on school property.
14. Discipline students for disorderly conduct on the way to and from school.
15. Except as provided in section 15-1224, deposit all monies received by the district as gifts, grants and devises with the county treasurer who shall credit the deposits as designated in the uniform system of financial records. If not inconsistent with the terms of the gifts, grants and devises given, any balance remaining after expenditures for the intended purpose of the monies have been made shall be used for reduction of school district taxes for the budget year, except that in the case of accommodation schools the county treasurer shall carry the balance forward for use by the county school superintendent for accommodation schools for the budget year.
16. Provide that, if a parent or legal guardian chooses not to accept a decision of the teacher as provided in section 15-521, paragraph 3, the parent or legal guardian may request in writing that the governing board review the teacher's decision. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to release school districts from any liability relating to a child's promotion or retention.
17. Provide for adequate supervision over pupils in instructional and noninstructional activities by certificated or noncertificated personnel.
18. Use school monies received from the state and county school apportionment exclusively for payment of salaries of teachers and other employees and contingent expenses of the district.
19. Make an annual report to the county school superintendent on or before October 1 each year in the manner and form and on the blanks prescribed by the superintendent of public instruction or county school superintendent. The board shall also make reports directly to the county school superintendent or the superintendent of public instruction whenever required.
20. Deposit all monies received by school districts other than student activities monies or monies from auxiliary operations as provided in sections 15-1125 and 15-1126 with the county treasurer to the credit of the school district except as provided in paragraph 21 of this subsection and sections 15-1223 and 15-1224, and the board shall expend the monies as provided by law for other school funds.
21. Establish a bank account in which the board during a month may deposit miscellaneous monies received directly by the district. The board shall remit monies deposited in the bank account at least monthly to the county treasurer for deposit as provided in paragraph 20 of this subsection and in accordance with the uniform system of financial records.
22. Employ an attorney admitted to practice in this state whose principal practice is in the area of commercial real estate, or a real estate broker who is licensed by this state and who is employed by a reputable commercial real estate company, to negotiate a lease of five or more years for the school district if the governing board decides to enter into a lease of five or more years as lessor of school buildings or grounds as provided in section 15-342, paragraph 7 or 10. Any lease of five or more years negotiated pursuant to this paragraph shall provide that the lessee is responsible for payment of property taxes pursuant to the requirements of section 42-11104.
23. Prescribe and enforce policies and procedures for disciplinary action against a teacher who engages in conduct that is a violation of the policies of the governing board but that is not cause for dismissal of the teacher or for revocation of the certificate of the teacher. Disciplinary action may include suspension without pay for a period of time not to exceed ten school days. Disciplinary action shall not include suspension with pay or suspension without pay for a period of time longer than ten school days. The procedures shall include notice, hearing and appeal provisions for violations that are cause for disciplinary action. The governing board may designate a person or persons to act on behalf of the board on these matters.
24. Prescribe and enforce policies and procedures for disciplinary action against an administrator who engages in conduct that is a violation of the policies of the governing board regarding duties of administrators but that is not cause for dismissal of the administrator or for revocation of the certificate of the administrator. Disciplinary action may include suspension without pay for a period of time not to exceed ten school days. Disciplinary action shall not include suspension with pay or suspension without pay for a period of time longer than ten school days. The procedures shall include notice, hearing and appeal provisions for violations that are cause for disciplinary action. The governing board may designate a person or persons to act on behalf of the board on these matters. For violations that are cause for dismissal, the provisions of notice, hearing and appeal in chapter 5, article 3 of this title shall apply. The filing of a timely request for a hearing suspends the imposition of a suspension without pay or a dismissal pending completion of the hearing.
25. Notwithstanding section 13-3108, prescribe and enforce policies and procedures that prohibit a person from carrying or possessing a weapon on school grounds unless the person is a peace officer or has obtained specific authorization from the school administrator.
26. Prescribe and enforce policies and procedures relating to the health and safety of all pupils participating in district sponsored practice sessions, games or other interscholastic athletic activities, including the provision of water.
27. Prescribe and enforce policies and procedures regarding the smoking of tobacco within school buildings. The policies and procedures shall be adopted in consultation with school district personnel and members of the community and shall state whether smoking is prohibited in school buildings. If smoking in school buildings is not prohibited, the policies and procedures shall clearly state the conditions and circumstances under which smoking is permitted, those areas in a school building that may be designated as smoking areas and those areas in a school building that may not be designated as smoking areas.
28. Establish an assessment, data gathering and reporting system as prescribed in chapter 7, article 3 of this title.
29. Provide special education programs and related services pursuant to section 15-764, subsection A to all children with disabilities as defined in section 15-761.
30. Administer competency tests prescribed by the state board of education for the graduation of pupils from high school.
31. Secure insurance coverage for all construction projects for purposes of general liability, property damage and workers' compensation and secure performance and payment bonds for all construction projects.
32. Keep on file the resumes of all current and former employees who provide instruction to pupils at a school. Resumes shall include an individual's educational and teaching background and experience in a particular academic content subject area. A school district shall inform parents and guardians of the availability of the resume information and shall make the resume information available for inspection on request of parents and guardians of pupils enrolled at a school. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to require any school to release personally identifiable information in relation to any teacher or employee including the teacher's or employee's address, salary, social security number or telephone number.
33. Report to local law enforcement agencies any suspected crime against a person or property that is a serious offense as defined in section 13-604 or that involves a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument or serious physical injury and any conduct that poses a threat of death or serious physical injury to employees, students or anyone on the property of the school. This paragraph does not limit or preclude the reporting by a school district or an employee of a school district of suspected crimes other than those required to be reported by this paragraph. For the purposes of this paragraph, "dangerous instrument", "deadly weapon" and "serious physical injury" have the same meaning prescribed in section 13-105.
34. In conjunction with local law enforcement agencies and local medical facilities, develop an emergency response plan for each school in the school district in accordance with minimum standards developed jointly by the department of education and the division of emergency management within the department of emergency and military affairs.
35. Annually assign at least one school district employee to participate in a multihazard crisis training program developed or selected by the governing board.
36. Provide written notice to the parents or guardians of all students affected in the school district at least thirty days prior to a public meeting to discuss closing a school within the school district. The notice shall include the reasons for the proposed closure and the time and place of the meeting. The governing board shall fix a time for a public meeting on the proposed closure no less than thirty days before voting in a public meeting to close the school. The school district governing board shall give notice of the time and place of the meeting. At the time and place designated in the notice, the school district governing board shall hear reasons for or against closing the school. The school district governing board is exempt from this paragraph if it is determined by the governing board that the school shall be closed because it poses a danger to the health or safety of the pupils or employees of the school.
37. Incorporate instruction on Native American history into appropriate existing curricula.
38. Prescribe and enforce policies and procedures allowing pupils who have been diagnosed with anaphylaxis by a health care provider licensed pursuant to title 32, chapter 13, 14, 17 or 25 or by a registered nurse practitioner licensed and certified pursuant to title 32, chapter 15 to carry and self-administer emergency medications including auto-injectable epinephrine while at school and at school sponsored activities. The pupil's name on the prescription label on the medication container or on the medication device and annual written documentation from the pupil's parent or guardian to the school that authorizes possession and self-administration is sufficient proof that the pupil is entitled to the possession and self-administration of the medication. The policies shall require a pupil who uses auto-injectable epinephrine while at school and at school sponsored activities to notify the nurse or the designated school staff person of the use of the medication as soon as practicable. A school district and its employees are immune from civil liability with respect to all decisions made and actions taken that are based on good faith implementation of the requirements of this paragraph, except in cases of wanton or wilful neglect.
39. Allow the possession and self-administration of prescription medication for breathing disorders in handheld inhaler devices, by pupils who have been prescribed that medication by a health care professional licensed pursuant to title 32. The pupil's name on the prescription label on the medication container or on the handheld inhaler device and annual written documentation from the pupil's parent or guardian to the school that authorizes possession and self-administration shall be sufficient proof that the pupil is entitled to the possession and self-administration of the medication. A school district and its employees are immune from civil liability with respect to all decisions made and actions taken that are based on a good faith implementation of the requirements of this paragraph.
40. Prescribe and enforce policies and procedures to prohibit pupils from harassing, intimidating and bullying other pupils on school grounds, on school property, on school buses, at school bus stops and at school sponsored events and activities that include the following components:
(a) A procedure for pupils to confidentially report to school officials incidents of harassment, intimidation or bullying.
(b) A procedure for parents and guardians of pupils to submit written reports to school officials of suspected incidents of harassment, intimidation or bullying.
(c) A requirement that school district employees report suspected incidents of harassment, intimidation or bullying to the appropriate school official.
(d) A formal process for the documentation of reported incidents of harassment, intimidation or bullying, except that no documentation shall be maintained unless the harassment, intimidation or bullying has been proven.
(e) A formal process for the investigation by the appropriate school officials of suspected incidents of harassment, intimidation or bullying.
(f) Disciplinary procedures for pupils who have admitted or been found to have committed incidents of harassment, intimidation or bullying.
(g) A procedure that sets forth consequences for submitting false reports of incidents of harassment, intimidation or bullying.
41. Prescribe and enforce policies and procedures regarding changing or adopting attendance boundaries that include the following components:
(a) A procedure for holding public meetings to discuss attendance boundary changes or adoptions that allows public comments.
(b) A procedure to notify the parents or guardians of the students affected.
(c) A procedure to notify the residents of the households affected by the attendance boundary changes.
(d) A process for placing public meeting notices and proposed maps on the school district's website for public review, if the school district maintains a website.
(e) A formal process for presenting the attendance boundaries of the affected area in public meetings that allows public comments.
(f) A formal process for notifying the residents and parents or guardians of the affected area as to the decision of the governing board on the school district's website, if the school district maintains a website.
(g) A formal process for updating attendance boundaries on the school district's website within ninety days of an adopted boundary change. The school district shall send a direct link to the school district's attendance boundaries website to the department of real estate.
(h) If the land that a school was built on was donated within the past five years, a formal process to notify the entity who donated the land affected by the decision of the governing board.
B. Notwithstanding subsection A, paragraphs 8, 10 and 12 of this section, the county school superintendent may construct, improve and furnish school buildings or purchase or sell school sites in the conduct of an accommodation school.
C. If any school district acquires real or personal property, whether by purchase, exchange, condemnation, gift or otherwise, the governing board shall pay to the county treasurer any taxes on the property that were unpaid as of the date of acquisition, including penalties and interest. The lien for unpaid delinquent taxes, penalties and interest on property acquired by a school district:
1. Is not abated, extinguished, discharged or merged in the title to the property.
2. Is enforceable in the same manner as other delinquent tax liens.
D. The governing board may not locate a school on property that is less than one-fourth mile from agricultural land regulated pursuant to section 3-365, except that the owner of the agricultural land may agree to comply with the buffer zone requirements of section 3-365. If the owner agrees in writing to comply with the buffer zone requirements and records the agreement in the office of the county recorder as a restrictive covenant running with the title to the land, the school district may locate a school within the affected buffer zone. The agreement may include any stipulations regarding the school, including conditions for future expansion of the school and changes in the operational status of the school that will result in a breach of the agreement.
E. A school district, its governing board members, its school council members and its employees are immune from civil liability for the consequences of adoption and implementation of policies and procedures pursuant to subsection A of this section and section 15-342. This waiver does not apply if the school district, its governing board members, its school council members or its employees are guilty of gross negligence or intentional misconduct.
F. A governing board may delegate in writing to a superintendent, principal or head teacher the authority to prescribe procedures that are consistent with the governing board's policies.
G. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, a school district governing board shall not take any action that would result in an immediate reduction or a reduction within three years of pupil square footage that would cause the school district to fall below the minimum adequate gross square footage requirements prescribed in section 15-2011, subsection C, unless the governing board notifies the school facilities board established by section 15-2001 of the proposed action and receives written approval from the school facilities board to take the action. A reduction includes an increase in administrative space that results in a reduction of pupil square footage or sale of school sites or buildings, or both. A reduction includes a reconfiguration of grades that results in a reduction of pupil square footage of any grade level. This subsection does not apply to temporary reconfiguration of grades to accommodate new school construction if the temporary reconfiguration does not exceed one year. The sale of equipment that results in an immediate reduction or a reduction within three years that falls below the equipment requirements prescribed in section 15-2011, subsection B is subject to commensurate withholding of school district capital outlay revenue limit monies pursuant to the direction of the school facilities board. Except as provided in section 15-342, paragraph 10, proceeds from the sale of school sites, buildings or other equipment shall be deposited in the school plant fund as provided in section 15-1102.
H. Subsections C through G of this section apply to a county board of supervisors and a county school superintendent when operating and administering an accommodation school.
I. Until the state board of education and the auditor general adopt rules pursuant to section 15-213, subsection I, a school district may procure construction services, including services for new school construction pursuant to section 15-2041, by the construction-manager-at-risk, design-build and job-order-contracting methods of project delivery as provided in title 41, chapter 23, except that the rules adopted by the director of the department of administration do not apply to procurements pursuant to this subsection. Any procurement commenced pursuant to this subsection may be completed pursuant to this subsection.
privacy statment
Last edited on Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:48 am by gadfly
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:28 am |
|
| Let's try again gadfly......respond to my questions a few posts ago. You haven't showed me anything yet. Joe Bernier
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:26 am |
|
| Gadfly...You are off on a tangent again.....my statement refers to the here and now....not what some district is going to do in 2010....plus...you might want to see their entire policy before you think they removed parental permission....Joe Bernier
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:18 am |
|
I will make another factual statement. When I researched the number of school shootings/ closed campuses.....95% of the shootings occurred at closed campus schools. While less than 2% of all open campus schools have EVER experienced a lunchtime traffic fatality.
Let's try again Joe - send your research, send your link.
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:17 am |
|
gadfly wrote: all students for the 09-10 SY. At that time no students will be allowed to leave campus for lunch.
Read it Joe.
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:14 am |
|
Joewrites4rights wrote: Gadfly.....NO!!! If you want to be fair....You SHOW ME how this policy follows the LAW!!! You are leaving things out of your questions and comments. Follow what I wrote. I wrote how this policy violates a law, I did not cite any state board of education rules. Don't waste time by taking it one question at a time, and then head out on some tangent. Go ahead and answer all of my comments and questions as I have answered yours. If you want to be fair.....Joe Bernier
P.S. BTW...you don't need to paste and include what you are commenting on everytime you post....especially when the posts are so close together...it saves everybody some time...
Joe -you are really such a fraud, aren't you? If you had done any research and actually had it, you would send it to me. You really don't have a thing do you?
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:12 am |
|
| Gadfly...you proved my point...even this district allows juniors and seniors off campus. Joe Bernier
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:08 am |
|
You said:
Show me even one campus that was made safer when it closed.....better yet....show me just one campus that does NOT allow for parental permission. There isn't one.
The research you may recall is that I researched my first two schools districts in Arizona. Buckeye and Tucson. Both districts are much in favor of closing the campuses. You then came back and said, well Peoria is the only one in the nation that doesn't allow parental permission.
Here is Buckeye Union High, the first one I researched .Does this count as one (my very first one - I don't see anything regarding parental permission, do you, Joe?)
http://buhsd.org/asp/Site/About/whatsnew/details.asp?Id=34
What's New
Changes to the Open Campus Lunch Policy at BUHS
Beginning with the 07-08 SY, all freshman and sophomores will have a CLOSED campus. Juniors and seniors will still have the open campus option. The proposal will close juniors for the 08-09 SY and all students for the 09-10 SY. At that time no students will be allowed to leave campus for lunch.
Last edited on Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:10 am by gadfly
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:05 am |
|
| Gadfly.....you answer my questions and I'll send you my research....You are just avoiding answering my questions....you can do some research yourself. I have already posted how I got those numbers.....if you research the topic...you will get the same numbers. Joe Bernier
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 05:59 am |
|
You see Joe, the way this works, when you say you have facts, you have backup to prove what you say. When you say, which you did:
I will make another factual statement. When I researched the number of school shootings/ closed campuses.....95% of the shootings occurred at closed campus schools. While less than 2% of all open campus schools have EVER experienced a lunchtime traffic fatality.
Please send me your link to this. Time magazine, Arizona Republic, New York Times, Washington Post, where???
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 05:57 am |
|
Gadfly.....NO!!! If you want to be fair....You SHOW ME how this policy follows the LAW!!! You are leaving things out of your questions and comments. Follow what I wrote. I wrote how this policy violates a law, I did not cite any state board of education rules. Don't waste time by taking it one question at a time, and then head out on some tangent. Go ahead and answer all of my comments and questions as I have answered yours. If you want to be fair.....Joe Bernier
P.S. BTW...you don't need to paste and include what you are commenting on everytime you post....especially when the posts are so close together...it saves everybody some time...
Last edited on Thu Nov 8th, 2007 06:02 am by Joewrites4rights
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 05:34 am |
|
Joewrites4rights wrote: Gadfly....if you want to keep your head in the sand, go ahead. For you to say that RDG has a life, like this isn't important, then why do so many people (like you and rdg) want to control it. If it's "just lunch" then let us have our lunch...our way. For you to cut and paste my comments and replies to closers opinions, out of context and dialogue, is far reaching on your part. For you to say I haven't given facts is a pure lie. You look it up yourself if you don't believe me!!!
Schools in Maine (and Oregon) ARE giving birth control out to students WITHOUT parental knowlege or consent. The schools ARE nosing into parenting.
ARS 15-341 states exactly what I wrote....word for word. Look it up. I showed how the Governing board is out of line by creating a non- educational policy, this statute only allows Governing boards to create EDUCATIONAL policies that are NOT inconsistant with the law....not policies of incarceration that violate the law. YOU SHOW ME how this isn't true!!!
Look up the laws about incarceration yourself.....I showed you how this policy violates that law....you want to debate that....YOU SHOW ME how it doesn't violate that law.
Look up the Constitution yourself.....the 14th Amendment states exactly what I wrote....word for word.....you look it up....you read it....tell me how this policy respects that amendment. I showed you how it doesn't....if you want to debate me....SHOW ME how it does.
Why don't YOU do some research? I've researched many campus policies...I've visited 17 campuses in 5 states. Not one has been made safer by closing. The safest campuses are actually fence-less and totally open. They have great security policies in place and diligent monitoring systems, all which cost less than the extra shade and tables the district bought. How many have YOU researched? How many have YOU visited? How many have YOU found that have made their campuses safer by closing? The closers haven't even been able to find one. You, my friend, are not capable of this debate unless you have some hard evidence to the contrary.
Please tell me that YOU have some factual data, or even something other than your blind opinions. Please tell me that you've actually read what I have brought up and referenced. I don't mind a debate about what something actually says or states....but your mindless "I need a link from you or I don't believe you" is ridiculous. Joe Bernier
Let's be fair here, Joe, I have not made the wild statements that you have. You are the person with the "facts", isn't that your favorite word?
Let's take these one by one.... you said:
ARS 13-341 states that governing board policies must follow the laws. Closed campus policies that do not allow for parental permission do not follow the law, the law they break is called unlawful incarceration
The one cite you had in your posts was ARS13-341. As I gather from your latest post, you have figured out there is no ARS13-341. I am assuming you meant 15-341. I am looking at 15-341. The closest passage I am finding related to what you are saying is 15-341-A:
A. The governing board shall:
1. Prescribe and enforce policies and procedures for the governance of the schools, not inconsistent with law or rules prescribed by the state board of education.
Joe - how is closing the campuses inconsistent with the law or rules prescribed by the state board of education? Do you have a specific cite this is against the rules of the state board of education? How did you then make the jump from this to unlawful incarceration? Please advise.
After you set me straight on this one, the next one will be your statement that this board's action was the only like this in the United States. You did say this!!!
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 05:07 am |
|
Gadfly....and others who need help looking things up...links for you.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/10/18/middleschool.contraception.ap/
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/15/00341.htm&Title=15&DocType=ARS
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/01303.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am14.html
Now that you have some links...will you keep your mind tightly closed....or will you at least consider our argument for freedom of choice. Joe Bernier Last edited on Thu Nov 8th, 2007 05:23 am by Joewrites4rights
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 04:50 am |
|
Gadfly....if you want to keep your head in the sand, go ahead. For you to say that RDG has a life, like this isn't important, then why do so many people (like you and rdg) want to control it. If it's "just lunch" then let us have our lunch...our way. For you to cut and paste my comments and replies to closers opinions, out of context and dialogue, is far reaching on your part. For you to say I haven't given facts is a pure lie. You look it up yourself if you don't believe me!!!
Schools in Maine (and Oregon) ARE giving birth control out to students WITHOUT parental knowlege or consent. The schools ARE nosing into parenting.
ARS 15-341 states exactly what I wrote....word for word. Look it up. I showed how the Governing board is out of line by creating a non- educational policy, this statute only allows Governing boards to create EDUCATIONAL policies that are NOT inconsistant with the law....not policies of incarceration that violate the law. YOU SHOW ME how this isn't true!!!
Look up the laws about incarceration yourself.....I showed you how this policy violates that law....you want to debate that....YOU SHOW ME how it doesn't violate that law.
Look up the Constitution yourself.....the 14th Amendment states exactly what I wrote....word for word.....you look it up....you read it....tell me how this policy respects that amendment. I showed you how it doesn't....if you want to debate me....SHOW ME how it does.
Why don't YOU do some research? I've researched many campus policies...I've visited 17 campuses in 5 states. Not one has been made safer by closing. The safest campuses are actually fence-less and totally open. They have great security policies in place and diligent monitoring systems, all which cost less than the extra shade and tables the district bought. How many have YOU researched? How many have YOU visited? How many have YOU found that have made their campuses safer by closing? The closers haven't even been able to find one. I've got two binders full of this information....You, my friend, are not capable of this debate unless you have some hard evidence to the contrary.
Please tell me that YOU have some factual data, or even something other than your blind opinions. Please tell me that you've actually read what I have brought up and referenced. I don't mind a debate about what something actually says or states....but your mindless "I need a link from you or I don't believe you" is ridiculous. Joe Bernier
Last edited on Thu Nov 8th, 2007 05:14 am by Joewrites4rights
|
gadfly
Member
| Joined: | Thu Oct 18th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 170 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 8th, 2007 02:43 am |
|
These are cut and pastes I have extracted from Joe's posts. Supporters of Joe, can we get some comments about these? Tell me these are quotes from somebody that is very logical and they make perfect sense to you.
And Joe, can you cite any sources that you used in coming up with your "facts". I know you said you googled a lot, but give me one link that will support anything you have said over the last few months and passed them off as "fact". You have not cited one source as yet. Give us one link.
And Joe, you made the comment that RDG quit 'learning just like six other closers did'. I think a more apt comment would be RDG and others have lives and it came a time to quit arguing about something so illogical.
And one more thing, Joe, now that I have seen the video and read the email , your daughter was totally out of line in doing what she did - it was totally inexcusable and stupid....They should have kicked her butt out of school.
I f these type of closed minded decisions continue to get made by the board, we won't be far behind the other districts that are now giving birth control pills to Jr. High school kids without parental consent.
and as a public school the district and school MUST follow the Constitution, and respect both the rights of parents and students!!! ....
ARS 13-341 states that governing board policies must follow the laws. Closed campus policies that do not allow for parental permission do not follow the law, the law they break is called unlawful incarceration
can even go farther, when the schools impound and take control of the students vehicles by locking the parking lots, it's elevated to kidnapping.
Plus....this policy violates everyone's liberties, a direct violation of the 14th amendment. These are the facts!!!
For example, if the whole city voted to keep you locked up in your house, even though it passed by a majority vote. The city would not be able to do it because it violates your rights. ie; liberties. Granted to you by the Constitution!!! Not any city policy, rules, charter, municipality ordinances, or school district policy.....NOT ANY OF THEM...super cede the Constitution of the United States
Show me even one campus that was made safer when it closed.....better yet....show me just one campus that does NOT allow for parental permission. There isn't one....that's what you and the closers don't understand
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 6th, 2007 10:05 pm |
|
Ghost....what you don't see in my daughters email (simply because you were not witness to the conversations at the previous board meetings) is that Cheyenne is writing not from the point of view of the perpetrator, but of the victim. The potential victim of acts of violence on campus. Come on now....huge difference. KK knows it....if she doesn't, she is not fit to lead. She said it herself in the paper, KK turned in Cheyenne's email for the purpose of trying to quiet Cheyenne. How dare she do that!!! Too chicken and paranoid to hit "reply" on the email....what a leader!!! It just shows, again, KK's inability to see both sides of this issue. She would rather have the person who disagrees with her "taken care of" instead of actually trying to understand where that person is coming from. We have NEVER brought up closed campus as the reason for Columbine....yet KK's comments say we did. It proves that she doesn't listen.....in fact she ignores all of us who don't agree with her. In fact, based on her comments in the paper.....she is not fit to lead. KK is making decisions based solely on what SHE wants....not what her constituents want. Again, she alludes to the safety issue. We (the committee) studied it....We have the statistics. It IS safe to leave campus for lunch. Less people are hurt leaving campus than playing football. SHE doesn't think it's safe, WE don't want to live like HER....or any other super paranoid people. If you believe what she says, you would never leave your own home. The act of her leaving her home proves that even she doesn't believe what she is saying.
Just because they THINK something is unsafe....does not make it so!!! Joe Bernier
Last edited on Tue Nov 6th, 2007 11:22 pm by Joewrites4rights
|
AREYOUKIDDING ME
Member
| Joined: | Sun Oct 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 347 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 6th, 2007 04:25 am |
|
Apache Mom wrote: Michael and Frank have posted -- an intelligent alternative to RDG, surprisemotherof2, dadof3 and areyoukiddingme.
http://nohoneymoon.blogspot.com
http://eyeonpusd.blogspot.com
What exactly did they say that was so intelligent in Apachemommy's eyes?
|
Apache Mom
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 99 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 6th, 2007 03:39 am |
|
Michael and Frank have posted -- an intelligent alternative to RDG, surprisemotherof2, dadof3 and areyoukiddingme.
http://nohoneymoon.blogspot.com
http://eyeonpusd.blogspot.com
|
Desert Ghost
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 30th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 83 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 3rd, 2007 11:14 pm |
|
Wow, Joe, you're surely striking up some conversation.
I finally did get to see the video -- the administrator needs to control herself a bit, that's for sure. I understand that the conversation is heated, but her being a public figure, addressing a freshman in high school needs to be tuned down to a more civil matter. If she doesn't have the thick skin for the job, maybe a job as a librarian is more in order.
However, I do see how she can see a vail of a threat in your daughter's letter. My opinion is that both sides are ratcheting up the actions for better or for worse. Some in here said they can't see the threat, but I do -- I certainly could understand how one can percieve that as a threat. And despite posters in here stating "She knew it wasn't a threat" -- well, you don't know how anybody else other than yourself can interpret something -- especially something that's written.
Joe, you know I don't want the campuses open for lunch (I'm such a closer  ), but I'm glad you're having the fight! Stick with it buddy!
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 07:51 pm |
|
rdg7359 wrote: integrityforPUSD wrote: rdg7359 wrote: Joewrites4rights wrote: rdg...where in these posts did anybody write that it's about the kids leaving at anytime they wanted to? This is about locking them up....on their lunch break!!!
Joe, This is how I now perceive your argument. Now it seems to have become more than just a lunch time issue. You claim that many of the school shootings seem to happen at lunch time. Perhaps an open campus would help that. (I don't think so personally.) This now seems to be the platform you, your daughter and many others have taken. What if a school shooting happened before lunch or after lunch? Now what? Why would your limit the time frame of your children's safety?
If you want to bring Columbine into the mix and talk about your children being safe. What are your thoughts about metal detectors at each entrance leading into school? That would have prevented or at least limited the blood shed at Columbine, would it not? Wouldn't your children be safer against other children bringing guns and knives into school?
rdg7359,
Using that same logic, what if a teenager were killed in a car accident either before school or after school? Which does happen and fairly often. Do we then stop letting students drive until they turn eighteen? Or, how about we raise the driving age to twenty-one since most states consider this to be the age that people can handle drinking alcohol. maybe no one should drive until they are twenty-one. How far will we go to insure the safety of everyone on the road? Write tickets for those that are putting on make-up? Talking on cell phones? How about talking to their passengers? Every day I see people doing foolish things on the road, and we are talking about adults. How far do we go with regulating every thing and everyone?
There is no reasoning with any of you on this subject. When someone writes in rebuttal of your responses you throw everything but the kitchen sink out there to help prove your point. It isn't working and I believe it is hurting your cause.
Examples:
First it was that your Constitutional Rights were being violated along with your 14th Amendment rights. When asked to provide case law to support such a claim there has been none. I am talking hard documentation, facts and case law history with regards to Constitutional law and closed campuses, not opinion.
That didn't work, so you have thrown out violations of state statutes as being violated.
Next was the kidnapping definition and "children being held against their will". This by the way is the most ridiculous example that has been provided to prove your case.
Next came the Columbine reference and that again is just as far reaching as the previous example.
Now you want to throw driving to and from school as being dangerous. How far will you "openers" go to get your point across?
The solution has been made many times before and that is to home school your children if you do not agree with the new policy.
Home schooling has it's advantages. You don't have to worry about your child being bullied. They are sure to be the Valedictorian of "their "class. They surely will be voted as homecoming king or queen. And with any luck after they graduate they will be fortunate enough to land a home based job so they do not have to exposed to real life in the real world and can continue to live in fantasy land where everyone gets their way and everyone lives in a perfect world.
Lets see, you write a rebuttal and you see nothing wrong with your rebuttal. Yet, anyone else that doesn't think and/or believe as you do is throwing in everything but the kitchen sink....and that in your eyes is logical? No, I don't think so.
Joe Bernier and other parents haven't put any of the laws and rules to the test. He hasn't staged another protest, (Which personally I think is a mistake.) the students haven't attempted to leave during lunch nor has security or adminstration attempted to detain anyone. So until or unless someone puts the laws and rules to the test nothing will be proven.
You are the one that brought up, "What if there were a shooting after school or before." What sort of "reasoning" are you using? Then you resort to saying, "you can always homeschool your child." So why don't you homeschool your child? You seem to want to raise your child in a bubble, you would be better able to do this by homeschooling your child.
|
rdg7359
Member
| Joined: | Sun Feb 12th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 128 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 04:10 pm |
|
integrityforPUSD wrote: rdg7359 wrote: Joewrites4rights wrote: rdg...where in these posts did anybody write that it's about the kids leaving at anytime they wanted to? This is about locking them up....on their lunch break!!!
Joe, This is how I now perceive your argument. Now it seems to have become more than just a lunch time issue. You claim that many of the school shootings seem to happen at lunch time. Perhaps an open campus would help that. (I don't think so personally.) This now seems to be the platform you, your daughter and many others have taken. What if a school shooting happened before lunch or after lunch? Now what? Why would your limit the time frame of your children's safety?
If you want to bring Columbine into the mix and talk about your children being safe. What are your thoughts about metal detectors at each entrance leading into school? That would have prevented or at least limited the blood shed at Columbine, would it not? Wouldn't your children be safer against other children bringing guns and knives into school?
rdg7359,
Using that same logic, what if a teenager were killed in a car accident either before school or after school? Which does happen and fairly often. Do we then stop letting students drive until they turn eighteen? Or, how about we raise the driving age to twenty-one since most states consider this to be the age that people can handle drinking alcohol. maybe no one should drive until they are twenty-one. How far will we go to insure the safety of everyone on the road? Write tickets for those that are putting on make-up? Talking on cell phones? How about talking to their passengers? Every day I see people doing foolish things on the road, and we are talking about adults. How far do we go with regulating every thing and everyone?
There is no reasoning with any of you on this subject. When someone writes in rebuttal of your responses you throw everything but the kitchen sink out there to help prove your point. It isn't working and I believe it is hurting your cause.
Examples:
First it was that your Constitutional Rights were being violated along with your 14th Amendment rights. When asked to provide case law to support such a claim there has been none. I am talking hard documentation, facts and case law history with regards to Constitutional law and closed campuses, not opinion.
That didn't work, so you have thrown out violations of state statutes as being violated.
Next was the kidnapping definition and "children being held against their will". This by the way is the most ridiculous example that has been provided to prove your case.
Next came the Columbine reference and that again is just as far reaching as the previous example.
Now you want to throw driving to and from school as being dangerous. How far will you "openers" go to get your point across?
The solution has been made many times before and that is to home school your children if you do not agree with the new policy.
Home schooling has it's advantages. You don't have to worry about your child being bullied. They are sure to be the Valedictorian of "their "class. They surely will be voted as homecoming king or queen. And with any luck after they graduate they will be fortunate enough to land a home based job so they do not have to exposed to real life in the real world and can continue to live in fantasy land where everyone gets their way and everyone lives in a perfect world.
|
Joewrites4rights
Member
| Joined: | Fri May 25th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 05:01 am |
|
| rdg....this is not the platform we have taken. It was an observation we made when doing research on this subject. This is just the only thing we have brought up that a board member had a tirade about. Other national studies showed that students respond negatively to senseless despotic control. Especially if they are exposed to it over a long period of time. This is nothing more than logic to anyone who has teenagers, or remembers being one themselves. You know what....since the closers want to be like all the other (lesser) school districts, they probably will bring in metal detectors. They will never try to simply understand students, engage in meaningful dialogue with other students or even educators with good ideas. I have visited many campuses, it's very easy to tell what type of principal is in charge (tyrannical control freaks vs students first). The students and faculty both put out a vibe. And when you interview them, the difference is night and day. The student first campuses (even the closed campuses) have a positive atmosphere, the students are well taken care of and their opinions count, so much that the staff feels that they owe the student a good experience. For example, one school I visited in Mesa actually monitors lunch line waits, they fail themselves if a student has to wait in line for more than 12 minutes, the won't tolerate that low level of service. The tyrannical run campuses (which the governing board is forcing upon the district) have extremely low morale, poor school spirit, and the students can't wait to leave school. They suffer from even more stupid restrictions that have come on over the years, like no water bottles allowed, no shirts with bands on them, no shirts with sports teams on them....why....because these things are believed (by the closer mindset) to cause fights. Enough of that...I will kindly ask you again....I don't agree (and I have the statistics to prove it) that closed campuses are safer. Why can't we both just do what we want? Why do you insist that we live under your opinion of what is right? Joe Bernier
|
integrityforPUSD
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 01:20 am |
|
rdg7359 wrote: Joewrites4rights wrote: rdg...where in these posts did anybody write that it's about the kids leaving at anytime they wanted to? This is about locking them up....on their lunch break!!!
Joe, This is how I now perceive your argument. Now it seems to have become more than just a lunch time issue. You claim that many of the school shootings seem to happen at lunch time. Perhaps an open campus would help that. (I don't think so personally.) This now seems to be the platform you, your daughter and many others have taken. What if a school shooting happened before lunch or after lunch? Now what? Why would your limit the time frame of your children's safety?
If you want to bring Columbine into the mix and talk about your children being safe. What are your thoughts about metal detectors at each entrance leading into school? That would have prevented or at least limited the blood shed at Columbine, would it not? Wouldn't your children be safer against other children bringing guns and knives into school?
rdg7359,
Using that same logic, what if a teenager were killed in a ca | | |