Enter The Strawman: Some Want Superintendent's Removal to Justify "Elected" Superintendent Model

Not "Enter Sandman" a fantastic song by Metallica.

Not "The Snowman" a very peculiar, unsuccessful and critically panned movie from a few years back....

Nope, this was "Enter the Strawman."

There was some legitimate anger among some concerned citizens and some school board members that erupted about how the rights and responsibilities handbook described, in lurid detail, a fictitious yet distrurbing scenario where a student was victimized by sexting,  then bullied, traumatized, and ultimately this young student committed suicide.  It was a bad move many thought for young students to be exposed to this at school--  even though sadly this sort of stuff ---and worse---does happen in real life here and around the country and parents need to discuss these sorts of issues with their children.  Parents need to do this. 

And this comes on the heels of some videos that many thought were outright racist as they apparently were demeaning toward white people.

And also after a recent push to eliminate the valedictorian and salutatorian from graduations--which was an initiative that ultimately failed because the school board said no.  

And I have heard other complaints as well.

Look, this is a conservative community, center right--not a woke leftist enclave.  Look at the voter registration numbers.  So yes, when some of these garbage ideas make their way into schools, I'm glad they are batted back.  But I'm also glad that the voters voted in the appointed superintendent model in 2018 so the superintendent can be hired and supervised and ultimately held accountable by the board for trying to bring this sort of stuff to Escambia County.  In the past, that wasn't the case and often the board was left in the dark, left in the dust, and the only initiatives that moved forward were the ones one guy wanted--the elected superintendent of schools.  Read all about Newpoint.....that's just one example of many.  There was one time, under the former superintendent (elected) that all 5 board members balked at his idea to convert deans to 3rd assistant vice principals to do paperwork at Ransom Middle School with fewer deans to handle the discipline issues--which were legion.  All five of us said "no way", yet that superintendent did it anyway, over the objections of 5 duly elected board members.  And there were other examples.  

It's not that way anymore though.  Thankfully.

So the school board members now who requested a discussion on the agenda last night on the current superintendent had every right to do so.

AND the other three who voted to remove that discussion item from the agenda had every right to do that.

Whether it is the county or the school board--you have to count to three to get anything done.  So three people didn't want the discussion and that is that.

(When I was a school board member under an elected superintendent, I had multiple agenda items I attempted to put under "Board Items" on the agenda but was never permitted to do so.  Now, under the appointed superintendent model--this happens--which is a good thing!)

The bottom line now is the School Board is in charge, they run the show, and the Superintendent is their employee.  But the board sets the vision, makes the policy, and runs the show.  So the pent-up anger and frustration should be directed at the board----not their employee.  Hold the school board members responsible if they are not hiring a superintendent who is following their vision, policy, and rules.  Getting "mad" at the superintendent lets the school board off the hook.  Don't let them off the hook if you are mad.  

And make no mistake--it's not about the structure of the superintendent.  The voters spoke in 2018 and we have the correct model now.  We didn't before.

So now the insidious strawman side of this whole story appears from many posters and commenters on various online chat sites and has manifested this current issue--employee discipline and/or counseling/performance evaluation over questionable initiatives and practices---into an attack on the appointed superintendent model the voters approved in a referendum 4 years ago.  Yes, they don't care about Superintendent Smith--they don't like him, are ambivalent about him at best, and it really isn't about him even though that's what they are saying it is..

They simply want to go back in time to a point where they can "elect" their own "Boss Hogg" superintendent again.  That's what it's all about.  Angry their side lost in 2018--anything that happens now with the new, appointed superintendent is their strawman to knock down and say "See---I told you we should have never given up our right to vote for our superintendent, see!"

Yes, they are using this episode and Dr. Smith in this pursuit.  He is the strawman here.  I happen to

think Dr. Smith is a very nice gentleman--I have no issues with him and I've met him on several occassions and we've had several pleasant, cordial conversations. Do I agree with that video?--no way.  Would I have ever supported getting rid of class leadership designations?--no way! And do I agree with race-centerd discipline schemes (leading to disparate punishment for similar misconduct by race) for students???--of course not! (even though multiple forms of  that has been attempted  and in some instances implemented for many, many years even over my strenuous objections and votes against these things when I was on the board and we had an ELECTED superintendent.   This is a FACT!)

But I'm not a school board member any longer and my kids have all graduated--so I don't know the ins and outs of what exactly is happening in the schools and everything Dr. Smith is doing and bringing forward day to day.   And this post is my opinion only based on my current experience with appointed executive administrators on the county commission juxtaposed with my 10 years under the elected superintendent model when I was on the local school board.  I'm a former school board member, so I don't know the exact dynamics of what is being brough forward by the current, board appointed superintendent.

But I do have an informed opinion-------- and I know a strawman developing when I see one.

The appointed superintendent (and his perceived performance deficiencies by some) is not an indictment on the voters' choice in 2018 to enter modern times (and what 98% of school districts around the country already do) and elect board members who then subsequently search for, hire, and ultimately appoint and oversee a professional superintendent.  

Two separate issues.