A modest proposal for MPUSD

The distrust that I hear coming from MPUSD's rank and file is not something that was created overnight. It's something that, deducting from what speakers said Monday during public comments, dates back at least three superintendents.

It's a shame, really. The little I know about the trustees -- most of them former teachers themselves --  tells me they have their heart and minds in the right places. They're working really hard in a seemingly thankless job. Nobody ever seems to be satisfied with what the district does.

I can see why too. After the most exciting portion of the program was over on Monday, two teachers decried the outrageous insurance premiums they have to pay. Class sizes have skyrocketed. Salaries remain stagnant.  Cost of living has gone up. We're working more with a lot less, and our bosses keep demanding more and more. Nothing we do is ever enough, right? I feel your pain, brothers and sisters. We're all on the same boat here.

But quite honestly, I don't think it's productive to blame the superintendent, or the trustees. We're facing a much bigger boogeyman: a changing economy that continues to be transformed and is not assuring us the same benefits we used to have 20 or 30 years ago. Changing mentalities that no longer support everyone should have decent healthcare and guaranteed income for everyone. (See more on that here).

So how does MPUSD move forward in that atmosphere? How does one regain trust? What's the first step?

Here's my modest proposal: trustees name three finalists for the superintendent job, three people the community gets to fully vet. Sort of what community colleges do: the candidates hold public forums, they meet with union leaders and community members and the trustees. Everyone has a chance to dig in their pasts, no surprises anywhere.

If college candidates do it, I don't see why superintendents can't. I'm told by a representative of the Association for California School Administrators nobody would want to have that type of public scrutiny, but these are people paid with public money. If they have nothing to hide, candidates should be willing to submit themselves to this test.

What do trustees get in return? The promise from the community that they're going to respect their final selection, and that they'll make a superhuman effort to support him/her in the new position.

We need to move forward here, folks. A "truth and reconciliation" commission of sorts. Nobody can work in this type of atmosphere, it benefits no one. And it damages those everyone says they're trying to protect: the children.