jackiedoherty.org

On Thursday, The Sun featured an article in its news section, claiming that Gail Cenik, office manager for the Election and Census Commission, didn’t understand choice voting: “It’s certainly not rocket science, but it may as well be for all the confusion swirling around proportional-representation voting these days,” began the article. “Even the head of the city’s election department doesn’t fully understand it. ‘If it passes, good luck to us. We’ll just have to figure it out,’ said Gail Cenik…” Well, I called Cenik on Friday regarding the story’s accuracy. Her response: “The article really didn’t convey what I said,” she noted, adding that it was taken out of context. “I’m not stupid. I understand the concepts and the reasons why people support it (choice voting). I don’t fully know how the tabulation works and that’s where I have to do my homework.” Cenik explained that getting those details has not been a priority since her office, which includes herself and two assistants, has had to verify the 8,000-plus signatures needed to put choice voting on the ballot; verify all other signatures required for the upcoming municipal election, including council, school committee and vocational seats; as well as prepare for upcoming special senate elections.

Apparently the complexity issue has cropped up in other arenas from those opposing a switch to a priority voting system. According to today’s Column regarding a debate on the issue on WCAP: “Former Lowell and Cambridge City Manager James Sullivan, who opposes the charter change, said it works in Cambridge because they are more “philosophical…When Fahlberg (Victoria Fahlberg, a lead proponent of choice voting) tried to challenge Sullivan’s comments, asking if he felt Lowell people were not able to comprehend the plan as well as Cambridge voters, host Warren Shaw, who was supposed to be an impartial moderator, shut her off.”

Is ranking your votes too complicated?? Check here for some details and stay tuned for more on this issue from me. On another note regarding media inaccuracy, check Mimi’s post at LiL today regarding a misleading Sun article on council candidate Ray Weicker’s recent vote on the Licensing Commission.

It’s no secret that over the years I have clashed with The Sun (and them with me) on various issues. In fact, here is a perma-link to a piece I wrote in October 2003—long before I ever imagined running for school committee. Since I’ve been on the school board, of course, our disagreements have continued in frequency and intensity—at times bordering on obsessive (on their part, not mine). Either they were unhappy regarding a particular vote I took and slammed me about it repeatedly, or I was chastising them for some issue regarding their coverage of Lowell schools. One thing, however, has remained constant: No matter how harsh my words, The Sun editors have always given me space and published my criticisms in a timely manner. As I link to my op-ed in today’s Sun, I want to formally acknowledge and thank them for that. It has not been my experience with other print media, such as the Worcester Telegram and the Boston Globe, who also have prompted me to write at times, but who have not been as generous with space. Honestly, thanks for giving me ink to share my views with your readers.

If interested, this page contains a collection of published op-eds and speeches. Of course, since starting a blog, most of my views have been expressed electronically here.

“I read the news today, oh boy…” It’s been one of those days, but after driving home tonight and listening to WROR play one Beatles song after another, “I have to admit it’s getting better,” as I definitely felt my mood lifting. The Beatles tribute tonight was in honor of today’s release of digitally remastered versions of all their studio albums, from Please Please Me in 1963 to Let It Be in 1970. Listening to the music got me thinking about an article I just read in the Sept. 3, 2009 issue of RollingStone entitled “Why the Beatles Broke Up—The Inside Story.” (Apparently the article is too current for linking at this time, but it is an interesting read if you can get it.) I was in middle school when the band fell apart, but I remember thinking it was all Yoko Ono’s fault. According to RollingStone, it was much more complicated than that. Also worth noting in this issue are comments in the “Editor’s Notes” about a Pew Research Center study, which determined that the Beatles bridge the generation gap and appear to be universally liked by all ages. (Who in the 60s would have thought rock ‘n roll would help transcend generational distrust?) As I pulled into my driveway to the harmonizing sounds of this amazing band (along with my own, not-so-harmonizing voice) belting out “Ah, look at all the lonely people…” I felt myself transformed into a lighter, freer me, and I just had to stay and finish the song with a group who made an indelible mark on my life.

Yesterday’s Sun has an article about Alison Laraba, the only challenger for a seat on the Lowell School Committee in the upcoming election. I met Alison Laraba through the Friends of Lowell High School (we’re both members) and especially noticed her during school budget hearings last spring. She is an outspoken parent with good ideas and I welcome her to the race for school committee. If you suffered through our budget hearings, you may recall Laraba as the speaker at the June 17 meeting who took issue with four members of the committee leaving council chambers while Sullivan School Principal Edith LeBran spoke about the importance of library media specialists. Laraba impressed me then as someone willing to take a stand for her convictions, and I look forward to an interesting campaign with her involved. Note:This LINK just in from LTC streaming video. (You can fast forward past Principal LeBran’s speech to see Laraba’s brief comments on the absent school committee members, but they are not shown leaving chambers due to the camera’s tight focus on the speakers.)

The number of candidates for school committee has steadily declined over the past six years, and quotes from my colleagues hypothesize why in yesterday’s article. As my earlier post on the issue reveals, “WANTED: Lunatics to run for school committee,” I have a few ideas of my own why more folks aren’t pulling papers for school committee. I also posted here why appointed school boards are not the solution. How do we get candidates interested in running and how do we overcome voter apathy? Given my slanted perspective, education seems key: not only education of our youth, but also consistent education of our community about the importance the board and our public schools play in the success of our city.

I first met Senator Ted Kennedy at a National Schools Board Association (NSBA) meeting in Washington years ago where he was the featured speaker. Before the meeting, those of us from the Bay State got a private audience with the Senator. We numbered about 20 folks from the Commonwealth, and I’ll never forget the sheepish grin on his face when he walked into the room and softly asked, “Massachusetts?” We nodded enthusiastically and clustered around him to shake his hand, make eye contact, and share a few words. Later, we were escorted into a huge auditorium where the front rows had been reserved for us. We had the best seats in the house as Senator Edward M. Kennedy entered behind us to thunderous applause and a standing ovation. I was proud to be from Massachusetts, to sit at the front of that huge auditorium with my colleagues and know that our Senator was a national champion for public schoolchildren. The cheers and adoration from thousands of school committee members from across the country felt like a personal accomplishment: he’s our Senator, he belongs to us!

A few years later, I got it in my head that I wanted Senator Kennedy to visit Lowell and see firsthand the good work being done in our schools. Federal resources for education had steadily declined under the Bush administration, No Child Left Behind was under-funded and over-mandated, and we needed help. I was a Lowell delegate at the upcoming Massachusetts more »

Being of a certain age, I grew up with Michael Jackson. I remember dancing with my cousin to the Jackson 5 for hours (ABC, it’s easy as 1,2,3) while choreographing our own elaborate steps and twirls. Michael, in particular, caught my imagination from the start.  I watched with the world as his music evolved and his sense of self morphed into something alien that made me sad. Days after his death, I’m still trying to make sense of what his music and persona meant to me. In Sunday’s Boston Globe, Wesley Morris wrote an article about Jackson that resonates, not only because it acknowledges his great musical talent and explains the allure he held for folks of all colors and nationalities, but because it attempts to understand why Michael Jackson was not good enough for himself—just the way he was created—with dark skin, round nose and nappy hair. Morris attempts to explain the struggle some African Americans have being okay with their blackness, and as a white female, I admit it’s not something I’ve experienced personally. But I do know about gender struggles—such as being okay with throwing like a girl, being emotional, or physically weaker than many men. I have experienced my own version of trying to accept myself as good enough as a woman in a post-feminist world that expects super-career-moms who handle jobs, childcare, community service, and managing the home without breaking a sweat. The unrealistic expectations are difficult enough; the fact that they thrive within an historical and cultural context that exalts manhood makes it worse. So yes, Morris hits a chord with me on many levels when he writes: “They – we – could see well past the bleached skin and unnatural Caucasian features. We could see his blues.” Finally, I understand better my empathy for Michael’s madness. On a more pleasant note, this link on Dick’s blog allowed me to revisit why I love dancing to Michael Jackson’s music and why watching him sing and move is still joyful—a gift he leaves us all. May he rest in peace.

Today’s Boston Globe features a tragic story about a four-year old girl killed by an 89-year-old driver, again bringing to the forefront the whole debate regarding driver competency and the elderly. Is it unfair to begin periodic testing for drivers after a certain age, and if so, what age is appropriate and how often should their driving skills be reviewed? My perspective may be somewhat skewed as I recently registered my teenager for a $699 driver’s education class. The course includes 30 hours of classroom instruction, 12 hours of on-the-road driving with an instructor, as well as a two-hour parent class. This is all in preparation, of course, for taking the road test to become licensed to drive. If safety is to remain paramount, and if we consider driving a privilege rather than a right, there must be some mechanism for regular review of driving skills—starting at whatever age gains consensus with lawmakers.  (Perhaps every two years beginning at age 70?) The reality is that folks age differently—some, as well as their cars, take the wear and tear of life very well—as this interesting video demonstrates. That doesn’t preclude our need for a system that makes sure those behind the wheel are still competent to be there.

Warren Shaw’s op-ed for an appointed school board in yesterday’s Sun claims a failure in our “system of governance” because of the “current crisis on the Lowell School Committee.” That argument is not only flawed and unfair, it’s undemocratic. The radio host, farmer, and former Dracut selectman argues against elected school committees because he claims Lowell’s board is ineffective:  According to Shaw, one member’s alleged criminal actions puts a whole board in crisis. Shaw also claims elected members can’t negotiate well because they may live near their employees, and centralized control is better because it is less adversarial. Perhaps Mr. Shaw would support appointed legislators next? Many state and federal legislators face judicial scrutiny, get elected by their neighbors, and are adversarial. Yes, our system of governance is at times messy, inefficient, contentious and flawed. (How else to explain eight years of Bush?) But to suggest the solution is cutting voters out of the process is wrongheaded and goes against the democratic foundation on which this nation was built. The remedy for good governance is what it has always been: informed, attentive and active citizenry who hold their elected leaders accountable. 

OK, I admit to being easily aggravated on the issue of appointed school boards. Search this blog for “appointed school committee” and you’ll see several posts on the topic. (This one is dated, but still relevant since the state has yet to enact election-day registration; and I like this one too.)  As for Mr. Shaw, he doesn’t even consider the district’s progress around instruction, professional development, curriculum, and safety when discussing board efficacy, and I doubt his children attended the Lowell Public Schools in the last 10 years (or ever). He also seems unaware that the City Manager is a voting member of the school’s negotiating team or that the state determines Lowell’s minimal share of the costs for educating its students. With all due respect, perhaps Mr. Shaw should stick to Dracut issues which one can assume he knows more about.

Two students from a Lowell parochial school have been confirmed to have swine flu. The students and their mother, who is a paraprofessional in the public schools, never attended school since returning from their vacation in Mexico, which means their exposure to others has been limited and did not include school buses or classrooms. Given confirmation of their illness, the students and their mother will not be returning to school until this is behind them. Lowell schools will also follow the protocol recommended by the Mass. Dept of Public Health, which allows that students and school staff who have recently traveled to an area where swine flu cases have been confirmed and who do not have symptoms may attend school. (Keep in mind, the flu has a 24-hour incubation period.) Obviously, everyone is on heightened alert, and school nurses will be educating staff and children about ways to avoid exposure. According to the Mass. DPH website on influenza, you can protect yourself and others from swine flu the same way you protect yourself from seasonal flu: Avoid holding, hugging, kissing, or shaking hands with anyone who has a cold or the flu. Wash your hands often with soap and warm water, or use an alcohol-based hand sanitizer.  Avoid touching your nose, mouth or eyes, and clean areas that are touched often like door handles and telephones.

Yesterday, Lowell Public School students were sent home with an advisory from the state that included preventative information; additional information will come home with students today in English, Khmer, Portuguese and Spanish as needed as well as a ConnectEd phone call being made to parents at 5 pm tonight. If you have other questions, the Health Department advises calling Massachusetts Resources at the toll-free number:1-877-211-6277 or for more on the swine flu, check the Center for Disease Control website.

Congratulations to Jim Campanini, editor of The Sun, on his award for “best editorial on a local subject” from the New England Newspaper Association as printed in today’s paper (couldn’t find the paragraph noting the award on The Sun’s website for linking, sorry). Luckily for Campy, the judges didn’t check the facts because this editorial has the same errors and half-truths it did when it was first published in June 2008. The newspaper reprinted the editorial today, explaining it was “the first time The Sun has received this award” as the reason for the replay. For me, the editorial has always stood out, not only for its inaccuracies and blatant attack on me personally, but because it was the start of about eight weeks of coverage on the same topic.