The June 7 meeting of the Santa Fe Public Schools Board of Education didn’t exactly end with the board members holding hands and singing “Kumbaya.” Board Secretary Linda Trujillo caused a stir about four hours into the meeting by suggesting that the board reconstitute its governance—ie re-vote for each of the leadership positions. Trujillo alluded to difficulties she had in getting issues onto the agenda and seemed to be targeting Board President Barbara Gudwin with her remarks.
“If I have run the meetings in a way that was disappointing to you, I think that’s something you could have brought to me; we could have talked about it…I’m really sorry you made that suggestion [to reconstitute the board governance],” Gudwin said at the meeting.
Although Trujillo’s comments were directed toward Gudwin, SFPS Superintendent Bobbie Gutierrez also seemed to take them to heart. Gutierrez related an anecdote of a visiting principal from one of the schools asking her how she tolerated the lack of respect she gets from the school board.
“If you want another superintendent, that’s your choice,” Gutierrez said at the meeting. “If you want another executive team, that’s your choice. And I suggest you make these decisions because I don’t want to work for people who don’t respect me.”
Trujillo didn’t return a call for comment, but Board Member Steven Carrillo tells SFR that he believes Trujillo felt Gudwin was stonewalling issues Trujillo wanted on the meeting agendas.
“I am not clear as to why Bobbie emoted in the way that she did,” Carrillo said of Gutierrez’s response, “when in fact it wasn’t really calling into question her performance; it was more the board itself.”
How despicable. I watched the entire board meeting online. Mrs. Gutierrez's comments were made in response to some inflammatory statements made by Mr. Carillo, not in response to the motion put forward by board member Trujillo. This is a blatant misrepresentation of the events. Interestingly, in your blog posting last week, someone edited out a large chunk of Mr. Carillos comments but conveniently left in the entirety of the Superintendent's comments. Did this reporter actually see/watch the entire exchange, which is available on the SFPS website?
What someone needs to investigate is the cozy relationship between the Reporter and the school board members it endorsed. Certain people in this community seem to have a direct line to the staff at the reporter. What kind of journalistic standards are being upheld by the new editor?
I've watched a good hour of debate at the school board in the last few weeks surrounding issues of a lack of trust between the new board and the Superintendent. How is that trust advanced when board member Wikle's partner directly accuses the Superintendent of lying and falsifying data in an open, public forum. And then Wikle declares the comments appropriate and that the Superintendent is "fair game".
If I were Superintedent Gutierrez I would be contacting a private attorney and looking into a defemation lawsuit after Wikle's stunt last night.
Dear "is this a joke?"
I do believe that Bobbie's emotional episode was triggered by Mr Carrillo's comment about 'mediocrity'. While I can see how Bobbie took that personally, I think he was referring to our entire district. Our graduation rate is either worst in the state or second worst depending upon which report you read. 'Mediocrity' sounds like a complement given our record.
Our School Board is accountable for that 'mediocrity'. That's where the buck stops.
As to the speech that Dr Cate Moses attempted to make at the June 21 meeting, I think you should know that she makes her own decisions and says what she feels like saying. The speech was not prompted or recommended by me.
However, what she said is accurate. And she has the right, under the first amendment, to say pretty much anything she wants during public forum. The law doesn't require that anyone speak the truth at Public Forum.
There's absolutely no case for defamation. The standard for public figures is very high.