Connect with us

Economy

School Board Approves Joseph Severance Package

THE TENNESSEE TRIBUNE — In a 5-3 vote, the Metropolitan Nashville Board of Education decided Tuesday to buy out the contract of Metro Nashville Public Schools Director, Dr. Shawn Joseph. Dr. Adrienne Battle will serve as interim director.

Published

on

By Peter White

NASHVILLE, TN — In a 5-3 vote, the Metropolitan Nashville Board of Education decided Tuesday to buy out the contract of Metro Nashville Public Schools Director, Dr. Shawn Joseph. Dr. Adrienne Battle will serve as interim director.

In a statement Joseph said it was his life’s mission to ensure equity and excellence for all children and the he would continue to do so. “I believe much has been accomplished despite the pervasive challenges I encountered when arriving, and I am so proud of the tremendous work of the thousands of teachers and staff members who have helped to move the needle for our children,” Joseph said. 

The terms were negotiated between Joseph’s lawyer and Metro Legal director Jon Cooper. Metro will pay Joseph’s attorney’s fees. The board approved the agreement Tuesday night.

The Metro School Board chamber was packed Tuesday with a pro-Joseph crowd. Some parents told the board that the turmoil and fighting has kept their children from getting a good education.

Joseph’s last day will be Friday, April 12, 2019. There were ten parts to the separation agreement, a couple dealing with potential lawsuits. Board Chair Sharon Gentry summarized the buyout agreement that required both parties to refrain from “talking bad” about each other in the future.

 “We have obviously reached an impasse,” said Amy Frogge (District 9).

The Metro School Board chamber was packed Tuesday with a pro-Joseph crowd. Some parents told the board that the turmoil and fighting has kept their children from getting a good education.

The Metro School Board chamber was packed Tuesday with a pro-Joseph crowd. Some parents told the board that the turmoil and fighting has kept their children from getting a good education.

 The board has been sharply split about Joseph’s leadership for months. Vice Chair Christiane Buggs, reflecting on the rift that has pushed Joseph out, said the board has tried to be Joseph’s boss and tell him what to do instead of helping him manage the district and the challenges facing Metro schools.

“Dr. Joseph is ready to go and leave what amounts to hostile working conditions so this a voluntary separation conversation. This is not a firing,” said Will Pinkston (District 7). Board Chair Sharon Gentry agreed.

“We are not terminating him. This is not a blight on his resume. It was, as he stated in his own statement, that it’s gotten to the point where he does not believe that the things that he values are aligning with the district, with the board specifically and it was time for us to part ways,” Gentry said.

 Amy Frogge (District 9) then read a statement attacking Joseph and criticized his handling of the school budget, sexual harassment complaints, and blamed him for low morale among teachers and staff. She also criticized the board for an “an epic failure of the board’s oversight capacity with regard to fiscal operations”.

 “I don’t personally believe that throwing out any number of allegations or accusations is holding the director accountable. We did not hold the director accountable because we did not do our part. It was our job to review the contracts. It was our job to follow up with Metro Legal if there were issues with contracts,” Buggs said.

School Board Chair Sharon Gentry, Rachel Anne Elrod, District 2, Vice Chair Christiane Buggs (District 5), Will Pinkson (District 7), and Gini Pupo-Walker (District 8) voted for the deal to give Joseph three months severance pay and $261,250 for the final year of a 4-year contract signed in July 2016.

Jill Speering (District 3), Amy Frogge (District 9, Fran Bush (District 6) voted against the deal. They wanted Joseph fired.

Anna Shepherd (District 4), who had also wanted to fire Joseph, did not attend the meeting.

This article originally appeared in The Tennessee Tribune

Activism

Through Ads and Advocates, Battle Over Calif. Gambling Propositions Heat Up

A statewide survey by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), conducted between Sept. 2 and 11 and released on Sept. 15, revealed that 54% of California voters would vote “no” for Prop 27, while 34% would vote “yes.” Twelve percent of the respondents were “unsure.” The survey’s authors wrote that a strong majority of Republicans wouldn’t vote for the proposition, compared to half of Democrats and independents.

Published

on

The dueling propositions have raised a combined $400 million for advertising leading up to Election Day this November.
The dueling propositions have raised a combined $400 million for advertising leading up to Election Day this November.

By McKenzie Jackson | California Black Media

Clint Thompson, a Santa Monica resident in his 30s, wouldn’t say he has been inundated with advertisements supporting or denigrating Propositions 26 and 27, but he sees an ad focused on one of the legislations each time he turns on his television.

“I usually watch the news during the day — NBC — and on NBC, Prop 26 or Prop 27 comes on every other commercial break per show,” said Thompson, an actor, who admitted he hasn’t researched the sports gambling propositions. “Both of the props seem to have good things with them. The commercials seem to have reasons why you should say ‘yes,’ or ‘no.’”

Prop 26 would legalize roulette, dice games, and sports betting on Native American tribal lands if approved by voters in the Nov. 8 election. It is backed by over 50 state Native American tribes.

Prop 27, supported by sportsbooks DraftKings, FanDuel, BetMGM, Fanatics, PENN Entertainment, and WynnBet, would give those sports betting companies the reins in sports gambling in the Golden State and allow online gambling.

If people like Thompson feel the advertisements from the campaigns for and against the propositions seem to be flooding the television and radio airwaves — and to be ever-present on social media (Watched a YouTube video lately?) — they might be right.

The dueling propositions have raised a combined $400 million for advertising leading up to Election Day this November. That has led to ads backing and slamming the two propositions to be front and center in all forms of media Californians consume.

Dinah Bachrach of the Racial Justice Allies of Sonoma County, a group supporting Prop 26, said the proliferation of ads supporting Prop 27 is concerning.

“They are all over the place,” Bachrach said. “Gambling is already a pretty big business, but to be able to do sports gambling online is dangerous because it hurts what tribal casinos have been able to do for their communities in the state.”

According to Bachrach, Prop 26 protects the sovereignty of native tribes. “It’s a really important racial justice issue,” she said. “Indian casinos provide a tremendous amount of financial support for the casino tribes and the non-casino tribes, and they contribute a lot locally and to the state.”

Bachrach’s organization is one of several civil rights or African American organizations that have thrown its support behind Prop 26.

Santa Clarita NAACP spokesperson Nati Braunstein said in an email, “The NAACP supports Prop 26, which would legalize retail sports betting at California tribal casinos only and opposes Prop 27 which would allow online sports betting via mobile sportsbooks.”

Kathy Fairbanks, speaking for the Yes on 26/No on 27 coalition, composed of California Indian tribes and tribal organizations, and other partners, said winning the approval of every potential voter, including Black Californians, is their goal.

Yes on 27 – Californians for Solutions to Homelessness, the campaign arm of Prop 27 backers, had not returned California Black Media’s requests for comment for this story as of press time. Prop 27 proponents say in ads and the Yes on 27 website repeats that the initiative would help solve California’s homelessness crisis.

Prop 27 imposes a 10% tax on adjusted gross gaming revenue. Eighty-five percent of the taxes go toward fighting California’s homeless and mental health challenges. Non-gaming tribes get the remaining 15% of tax revenue.

Organizations such as Bay Area Community Services, Sacramento Regional Coalition to End Homelessness, San Diego Regional Task Force on Homelessness, and individuals including Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia, Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf, Bay Area Community Services CEO Jamie Almanza, and Middletown Rancheria of Pomo Indians Chairman Jose “Moke” Simon are listed as Prop 27 supporters on the Yes on 27 website.

On the campaign’s Facebook page, commenter Brandon Gran wrote under an advertisement photo that voting for Prop 27 was a “no brainer.”

“People are already gambling using offshore accounts,” he typed. “Why not allow CA to get a piece of the pie … money that will (hopefully) go to good use.”

However, a statewide survey by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), conducted between Sept. 2 and 11 and released on Sept. 15, revealed that 54% of California voters would vote “no” for Prop 27, while 34% would vote “yes.” Twelve percent of the respondents were “unsure.”

The survey’s authors wrote that a strong majority of Republicans wouldn’t vote for the proposition, compared to half of Democrats and independents.

“Regionally, majorities in the Inland Empire, Orange/San Diego, and the San Francisco Bay Area would vote ‘no,’ while likely voters in the Central Valley and Los Angeles are divided,” they wrote. “At least half across most demographic groups would vote ‘no.’ Likely voters age 18 to 44 (52%) and renters (51%) are the only two demographic groups with a slim majority voting ‘yes.’”

The survey, titled “PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and Their Government,” did not ask participants about Prop 26. The Yes on 26/No on 27 coalition, said in a news release that the PPIC’s research confirmed what Prop 26 supporters have said for some time.

“Despite raising more than $160 million for a deceptive advertising campaign, California voters are clearly not buying what the out-of-state online gambling corporations behind Prop 27 are selling,” the statement read.

Continue Reading

Activism

We Will Not Incarcerate Our Way Out of This

Housing is a human right. We can use public resources to ensure everyone has a safe place to live and effective mental health and substance use treatment. Instead, we’ve gutted our social programs to the point where they don’t function and assume this lack of functionality means there’s no solution.

Published

on

As we’ve overfunded police and underfunded housing, treatment, and other essential services, we’ve seen more policing but less safety.
Last week, California Highway Patrol (CHP) and CalTrans violently evicted the Wood Street community, the largest encampment in the Bay Area.

People Are Liberating Public Spaces to Fight the Criminalization of Poverty

By Cat Brooks

How many times have you walked by an unhoused neighbor and told yourself it’s their fault, that they made the wrong life choices?

But the truth is that our unhoused crisis is the result of decades-long policies that criminalize poverty, addiction and mental health disabilities and treat human beings like garbage to be swept away with Friday’s trash while ignoring root causes.

Every city in the U.S. responds to visible poverty with fences, fines, cops, courts, and cages. These shortsighted responses make great photo ops, and let politicians pontificate, but all only accomplish terrorizing the most vulnerable, who move into new neighborhoods and reestablish their right to exist.

No matter how many arrests or evictions, the people will continue to be, and as part of that being — reclaim public spaces.

When San Francisco Supervisor Hillary Ronen called for the erection of fences around the 24th Street Bart Plaza, the community struck back and retook the plaza. @MissionDeFence_SF posted a statement in solidarity with other current public land struggles, including: People’s Park in Berkeley, Parker Elementary in Oakland, Echo Park in Los Angeles and Mystic Garden in Daly City.

These struggles are proof positive that the power lies with the people who will rise up, resist and reclaim the people’s space.

Last week, California Highway Patrol (CHP) and CalTrans violently evicted the Wood Street community, the largest encampment in the Bay Area. CHP (the 4th most murderous law enforcement agency in California) descended on the camp for phase one of an armed eviction that will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Wood Street’s estimated 200-300 residents are being offered little relocation support or resources. Only a fraction has been given shelters or RV spots. Two were arrested for non-violent civil disobedience amidst an outpouring of community support.

Most of the Wood Street folks are Black, several are elders, many extremely vulnerable, and almost all are victims of gentrification and criminalization.

I was there to bear witness as the state demolished a tiny home, towed RVs, and destroyed lives. No effort was made to move their homes and belongings. Mayor Libby Schaaf doesn’t believe the city has any obligation to do so.

In an open letter to Schaaf, Governor Gavin Newsom, and others, residents offered concrete solutions and laid out their needs. They’ve been asking for sanitation services and fire safety for years. They’ve been ignored.

In their letter, they wrote, “The Wood Street community stands strong in our determination to keep our community together. We plan to continue organizing and fighting for long-term and permanent housing solutions.”

For now, they’ll be forced to move into residential areas where NIMBYS will call cops to protect their fragile senses from the brutality of visible poverty. Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

This story is playing out across California.  Instead of meeting people’s basic needs, the state legislature does things like “CARE Courts” — to force unhoused people into court-ordered treatment that will cost millions and target Black and brown folks. The bill is Governor Newsom’s brainchild and a continuation of criminalizing the unhoused under the guise of “care” which he’s done since his days as mayor of San Francisco.

Housing is a human right. We can use public resources to ensure everyone has a safe place to live and effective mental health and substance use treatment. Instead, we’ve gutted our social programs to the point where they don’t function and assume this lack of functionality means there’s no solution.

Poverty is a political choice. Oakland’s unhoused population increased 24% since 2019 (thank you Libby), yet the Town spends 10 times as much on police as it does on housing.

As we’ve overfunded police and underfunded housing, treatment, and other essential services, we’ve seen more policing but less safety. We are less safe when we build walls to keep unhoused neighbors out of public spaces. We are less safe when we respond to mental health crises with a badge and gun.

We are less safe when the treatment plan for substance use problems is a cage.

If seeing unhoused people makes us uncomfortable, then we should invest in housing for all. If public drug use offends us, then we should invest in safe injection facilities (a proven public health intervention that Newsom just vetoed).

If watching someone experience a mental health crisis is distressing, then we should invest in community-driven approaches to support individuals in crisis.

Until we do these things, no matter how much our elected officials try to sanitize the crises we face, the people will keep knocking down fences to liberate public spaces.

Cat Brooks is co-founder of the Anti Police-Terror Project, executive director of the Justice Teams Network and host of Law & Disorder on KPFA, a new show that exposes the cracks in our system and agitates for resistance.

Continue Reading

Bay Area

COMMENATY: Integrity Matters. Honesty Matters at Oakland City Hall

This election is for the heart and soul of Oakland. Do we want to continue electing political insiders who are beholden to special interests, or are we going to empower the people and our shared values to create an Oakland for everyone?

Published

on

Treva Reid speaking at the Jewish Community Center Oakland Mayoral Candidate Forum on September 15. Photo courtesy of Treva Reid for Oakland Mayor campaign. 
Treva Reid speaking at the Jewish Community Center Oakland Mayoral Candidate Forum on September 15. Photo courtesy of Treva Reid for Oakland Mayor campaign. 

By Treva Reid

In my short tenure as a councilmember, I can tell you that integrity and honesty are missing at City Hall. As your next mayor, I will restore these basic yet powerful and core principles in the way our city is governed.

This election is for the heart and soul of Oakland. Do we want to continue electing political insiders who are beholden to special interests, or are we going to empower the people and our shared values to create an Oakland for everyone?

I am not a career politician, unlike some of my opponents. I say what I mean and vote for what I believe actual Oaklanders desire in our community. I have spent my first term in office listening to the residents of Oakland, bringing your ideas and values to City Hall, and I am committed to elevating this work as mayor.

As a councilmember, I have always been transparent with my constituents about the way I’ve voted — we may not agree on every issue, but you will know where I stand and why — without wavering. I have a proven track record of voting with the people and my conscience with wise, sound decisions. I am not a flip-flopper.

Last year, I was one of only two councilmembers who voted against the budget that did not deliver enough for Oaklanders on our public safety priorities. That budget stripped away and froze millions from the Police Department such as the Traffic Squad and Citywide 9-1-1 Surge Officers. They voted against a cost-neutral proposed budget amendment that I introduced to advance police academies to fill vacant officer positions, increase presence and reduce OPD response time to critical emergencies. It was not the people’s budget.

Unfortunately, the unprecedented rise in crime raged on unchecked, due to a host of factors, and with fewer resources to meet the increased emergency response or crisis response needed to support our city. The data, public safety updates, and our lived experience were clear. Soon thereafter, the Council adopted our proposal for additional police academies. Leaders must be held accountable to voters for their decisions that delay our critical response on issues that impact our communities.  It’s a disservice to the people.

I believe integrity and honesty are not things you learn–you either have them and practice them–or not.

We have less than 50 days before we elect our new mayor. Keep asking hard questions at candidate forums, look at our voting records, and hold us accountable for our actions. As mayor, I commit that I will govern with integrity and honesty, and that my decisions will be in the best interest of the City of Oakland. I will hold myself and my administration to the highest standards because Oakland deserves nothing less. I hope you will join me and restore integrity and honesty to City Hall. We deserve better.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending