|
|
Post by concerned2 on Feb 25, 2009 17:36:37 GMT -6
You most likely have seen the media stories about an alleged assault involving our middle school students that took place in early November in a private residence. I have a great deal of compassion for all of our families that have been impacted by this incident. Please know that the district's priority is to provide a safe learning environment and know that we are confident that is taking place.
This is an emotionally charged issue filled with legal complexities. Due to privacy laws protecting our students, I'm not able to address all specifics, but I'd like to clarify some of the misinformation regarding this story that seems to be in our community.
Some parents have suggested that the alleged assailants be sent to a non-traditional alternative school or home schooled. At Monday night's Board of Education workshop, the district's attorney spent nearly two hours discussing the legal options available to best address the situation. Under the Constitution, students have a legal right to a public education. Considering this alleged offense took place outside of school, there are limits to what actions the district can legally take. We can not legally move students to a non-traditional alternative school or force them to receive their education at home.
However, if a student is not in a safe environment, or a request is made by the family, a student could be moved to another school within the district. All parents in this case have been offered the option of moving to a different school, but have so far declined the offer. A forced move to one of our other schools is an option, but we have concerns with how welcomed this forced move would be received by the new school community and the impact it may have on students involved.
What we have the most control over is the course of action taken by our school staff to prioritize the safety of the students who remain in the school together. Upon notifying staff of the alleged incident on November 13, the victim's parents expressed their desire for the school to not have anything done to the students involved. However, school officials did take immediate action to address safety, and on multiple occasions the parents of all parties reached out to school officials to let them know they appreciated the school's actions to keep their students safe. It wasn't until the end of January that the alleged victim's family requested the district move the other students out of the school.
I am in contact with the school on a daily basis to monitor the situation and my first question is always "Are our kids safe?" The school has reported consistently that our students are safe and that students continue to be monitored for additional emotional or academic support if needed.
We have a tremendous school staff and I am highly confident they will continue to take appropriate measures to ensure the safety and well being of every student at the school.
My comfort with the decision to keep the students at the school was reinforced by a recent agreement between the two families involved that was reached in a civil court regarding the conditions of interaction between the students. Specifically, it was agreed that both students could remain at the school. The court's directive to the students closely mirrors the multiple steps previously taken by the school beginning last November. School administrators are confident in their ability to meet the conditions suggested by the court and will be able to continue to provide a safe and effective learning environment for all students.
We ask for your understanding as we continue to work through this emotionally charged issue.
Stephen Daeschner
Superintendent
|
|
|
|
Post by twhl on Feb 25, 2009 17:51:09 GMT -6
You most likely have seen the media stories about an alleged assault involving our middle school students that took place in early November in a private residence. I have a great deal of compassion for all of our families that have been impacted by this incident. Please know that the district's priority is to provide a safe learning environment and know that we are confident that is taking place. This is an emotionally charged issue filled with legal complexities. So give the speakers their 3 minutes and tell them to sit down and shut up. That seems appropriate. Due to privacy laws protecting our students, I'm not able to address all specificsanything, but I'd like to clarify some of the misinformation regarding this story that seems to be in our community. Some parents have suggested that the alleged assailants be sent to a non-traditional alternative school or home schooled. At Monday night's Board of Education workshop, the district's attorney spent nearly two hours discussing the legal options available to best address the situation. Under the Constitution, students have a legal right to a public education. Considering this alleged offense took place outside of school, there are limits to what actions the district can legally take. We can not legally move students to a non-traditional alternative school or force them to receive their education at home. But you can move them to a different school. Put em in your backyard if you have it under control. You made a decision not to. And for that we all will payHowever, if a student is not in a safe environment, or a request is made by the family, a student could be moved to another school within the district. All parents in this case have been offered the option of moving to a different school, but have so far declined the offer. A forced move to one of our other schools is an option, but we have concerns with how welcomed this forced move would be received by the new school community and the impact it may have on students involved. What we have the most control over is the course of action taken by our school staff to prioritize the safety of the students who remain in the school together. Upon notifying staff of the alleged incident on November 13, the victim's parents expressed their desire for the school to not have anything done to the students involved. However, school officials did take immediate action to address safety, and on multiple occasions the parents of all parties reached out to school officials to let them know they appreciated the school's actions to keep their students safe. It wasn't until the end of January that the alleged victim's family requested the district move the other students out of the school. Maybe just maybe the stress got too much and thats not your call SD - and welcome the lawsuit damages. And if you had it under control why didn't anyone come forward and tell everyone so?I am in contact with the school on a daily basis to monitor the situation and my first question is always "Are our kids safe?" The school has reported consistently that our students are safe and that students continue to be monitored for additional emotional or academic support if needed. And we gauge that how ?We have a tremendous school staff and I am highly confident they will continue to take appropriate measures to ensure the safety and well being of every student at the school. My comfort with the decision to keep the students at the school was reinforced by a recent agreement between the two families involved that was reached in a civil court regarding the conditions of interaction between the students. Specifically, it was agreed that both students could remain at the school. The court's directive to the students closely mirrors the multiple steps previously taken by the school beginning last November. School administrators are confident in their ability to meet the conditions suggested by the court and will be able to continue to provide a safe and effective learning environment for all students. We ask for your understanding as we continue to work through this emotionally charged issue. Stephen Daeschner Superintendent |
|
|
|
Post by warriordiva on Feb 25, 2009 17:53:37 GMT -6
Hmmm - can we say "b******t". It's the parents fault? I see that this is going to be the district's stance - it's a parental issue. Also - his facts are wrong - aren't there 3 families involved? The victim and 2 assailants? I'm so proud of our Superintendent such an upstanding guy...
|
|
|
|
Post by treehugger on Feb 25, 2009 18:35:35 GMT -6
HOW much did we pay the lawyer to write this letter??
|
|
|
|
Post by twhl on Feb 25, 2009 18:47:58 GMT -6
I'm sure we paid plenty !! Dr D's original version wanted to "fence the kids off". Counsel suggested he change it.
|
|
|
|
Post by casey on Feb 25, 2009 18:51:58 GMT -6
Why is it I can't ever hear or read a thing DD says without scratching my head and thinking "bullsh*t!". Unfortunately I have zero trust in the guy. He has dug our SD even lower than I would have thought ever possible. I have a vote of zero confidence in him or his decision-making.
This letter should have gone out quite a bit earlier. Take a look at 203 - their Super already was pro-active and put the information out there AHEAD OF TIME. They didn't sit back and wait for everything to blow up in their faces. That's one of the biggest criticisms I have of our District - there's no communication and if there is it always seems to come on a "need to know" basis. I can't wait for new transparency. We need a new superintendent in addition to 4 new SB members. Let's just hope that the current SB has enough sense to not extend DD's contract. We need to fence that baby off!
|
|
|
|
Post by sashimi on Feb 25, 2009 19:19:20 GMT -6
So because of privacy concerns, Dr. Deceptive conveniently can not share any fact that may shine a negative light on the District and Board's Keystone Cops act, but Dr. Doolittle then has no problem disregarding any of the victim's parents' privacy concerns and feels justified in attacking the parents of the victim?
It is an absolute embarassment that Dr. Divide and Conquer has taken liberty with the victim's parents decision after months of suffering to negotiate a restraining order (the father has publically explained that AFTER MONTHS of inaction, he did this to get SOME protection for his child). Good for this child's parents (for doing the best they can for their child).
Dr. Defensive, nice communication explaining how you are certainly in the right here. Dr. Daylate and a dollar short, thanks for addressing so quickly.
Bravo on your communication, and your style. I expected nothing less.
|
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on Feb 25, 2009 20:54:36 GMT -6
I can't believe we hired this guy! Oh I am counting the day until the upcoming election. We definately need changing of the guards. I was told today by a Gregory parent that one of the accused is now attending in D203.
|
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on Feb 25, 2009 20:55:46 GMT -6
Doesn't Alka Tyle live in Breckenridge? If so does she have children at Gregory? If so there is no way in hell she was not aware and did not discuss with her fellow board members....just not believable at all.  |
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Feb 26, 2009 10:13:18 GMT -6
Please know that the district's priority is to provide a safe learning environment and know that we are confident that is taking place.
-------------------------------
He states his opinion like it's fact. There is a difference.
|
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Feb 26, 2009 10:17:01 GMT -6
My comfort with the decision to keep the students at the school was reinforced by a recent agreement between the two families involved that was reached in a civil court regarding the conditions of interaction between the students. Specifically, it was agreed that both students could remain at the school.
--------------------------------------
And the other half of the story is that the parents felt they had to agree to that as the district was not keeping their child safe. So they had to use the legal system.
Same as Metzger's comments at the school board meeting. At least they are reading from the same talking points.
If the other school board members would listen and talk to the parents then they would have both side of the story instead of only what is presented to them by Daeschner.
|
|
|
|
Post by JB on Feb 26, 2009 10:19:46 GMT -6
Please know that the district's priority is to provide a safe learning environment and know that we are confident that is taking place. ------------------------------- He states his opinion like it's fact. There is a difference. They should strike any references to student safety being a priority. Change it to a tertiary interest prehaps, or passing thought. |
|
|
|
Post by jftb on Feb 26, 2009 10:28:07 GMT -6
I know the parents of the victim. It took a court case and a restraining order to get anything accomplished here. And what a crock. The parents have asked since day one to have the students removed from the school. Ridiculous utter nonsense. As usual.
|
|
|
|
Post by jftb on Feb 26, 2009 10:29:15 GMT -6
The only thing offered to the victim was for him to change schools. Hasn't he been through enough? Why should he, the victim, be the one to be punished. Again, ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Feb 26, 2009 10:38:00 GMT -6
This reminds me of the damage control spin letter about the MWGEN backout of a land sale... Same spin slant with 'out of context' cherry picked pieces where the whole presents an entirely different truth.... but if you pick out pieces and spin them (by filling in with bullsh!t), you can make it seem like something totally different transpired.....and somehow pat yourself on the back as if you're the Hero too. Sad. Just sad.
|
|
