The Virginian-Pilot
©
VIRGINIA BEACH
The School Board has paved the way to fill the open Bayside seat with one of its own.
Carolyn Weems, an at-large member of the board since 2002, was among the dozen who applied for the seat, which became available when Dan Lowe resigned for family reasons.
None of the applicants will get an interview, board Chairman Dan Edwards announced after a closed-door meeting Tuesday night. Instead, the board will convene for a special meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday to make an appointment. If the board had chosen to interview Weems and others, she would have had to resign.
If Weems is chosen, her at-large seat will open to applicants citywide. Only representatives of districts, including Bayside, must live within that neighborhood.
Earlier Tuesday, citizens spoke on behalf of several board aspirants.
The applicants included the Rev. Richard Keever, former pastor of Bayside Presbyterian Church; Carray Banks, director of the department of technology at Norfolk State University; Ashley McLeod, a PTA parent who co-chaired the division's Facilities Planning Committee; and former Beach teachers Vickie Pulley, Dottie Holtz and Carolyn Doetsch.
Applicants also included Susan D. Moore, who served as a school board member in Minnesota; Gary Ruegsegger, grant writer for Norfolk schools; and Cheryl Wolfe, an active PTA parent. The board did not consider William Burnside because he doesn't live in Bayside, or John E. Hamilton, who withdrew.
Several applicants said they would throw their hat in the ring again for an at-large seat.
"An interest in serving on the board is an interest in serving on the board," McLeod said. But she wondered what the change might do to the applicant pool. "I'll be curious to see how many people will drop out and how many will pick it up" when people can apply from around the city, she said.
Board member Sandra Smith-Jones has said she feels the process has been unfair to the Bayside applicants.
Lauren Roth, (757) 222-5133, lauren.roth@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
In bed with the Board
Several years ago,VB citizens chose to elect their School board members rather than contend with sugar-plum appointees. we know why. Here is an opportunity for the current school board to do the right thing but instead some of them chose to annoint one of their colleagues and rudely ignore 9 other serious candidates. This action flies in the face of our entire community. They voted for Ms. Weems expecting her to honor her 4 year commitment not to seek exceptions for her own ambitious, self-serving needs. Her persistent questioning at school board meetings betray her lack of knowledge in how schools function and suggest that someone is not doing their homework.
vbteecha99 You said it!
If no interviews were needed. The the Pilot needs to investigate just who this superior candidate is that the committee has already decided on. Something is Fishy! Why no story on the candidates?
Weems is the winner - So the rest of you should get over it!
Being ON the Board has its Privileges.
Now for the next brilliant idea - the board will advertise her at-large seat and actually interview the last suckers for this seat. If one of the bayside seat applicants is selected then this is a pure abuse of privilege. The Board members should enjoy your remaining time on the board, I'm voting it be your last. God doesn't like ugly.
Candidates were wronged
The candidates were wronged in this one. The process never identified finalist for the vacancy. What are the credentials of the other folks? If they knew this was about, "what does Weems want?" then, I'm sure they would not have taken the energy to apply and ask us to speak for our candidate. My pastor was wronged and he never had a chance. Appears crazy that now this process will start over again for the at-large seat. Even this article does not indicate that Weems even spoke on her own behalf - nor did anyone else for her, for what it's worth. The only person to be announced as a candidate for the seat was Weems, which she had released through the pilot, and if she didn't, apparently the board did it. That is proof enough that the fix was in because none of the other candidates were ever identified until today when we are told she is recieving the seat that she has never RUN for even when she had the chance. The good ole boys and girls have done it again!!
So Dysfunctional....
Really...how could the public have any input when no one knew who was interested in being appointed other than Weems.
Tough to have an opinion when the choices are kept secret. I think this was handled in a disgraceful manner...however..it is typical of the VBCPS SB.
Weems was the one who wrote a letter to the V-P defending the school board's decision to appoint a guy who was under investigation in Georgia for mismanagement of funds in the school district he was the Superintendent. He resigned and was later indicted. Had VBCPS hired him, we, then would have found ourselves in the embarrassing position of buying out his contract...another bad decision that could have cost tax payers a couple of $$ millions. If you remember, this, too, was a decision made behind closed doors.
Public Input...It's a Done Deal....
1. The SB doesn't televise public hearings on non-agenda items. This would have been considered a non-agenda item by the SB Chair.
2. If Weems is interested in this seat, she should not participate/be in the room during the discussions and should not be sitting at the dias when applicants speak.
3. The SB doesn't listen to the public anymore than the CC.
4. Most people feel this is a "done deal," with Weems the choice. Again the public is confronted with the incestuous nature of politics.
5. Choosing Weems and then going through the process again to fill her seat is non-productive. During a critical budgetary period, wouldn't filling another seat just be a distraction? And put the new member at a distinct disadvantage in the discussions? I believe state code says they have 60 days from the time of the resignation to fill the empty seat.
Our attorneys answer to - The Done DEAL
"The courts have further ruled that attempts to circumvent the letter of the law by gathering consensus through a chain of phone calls,e-mails mesages, or other devious methods are illegal acts and constitute misconduct on the part of the board members involved."
So VBCSB, what answer will the public get for your quick actions in announcing Weems to the paper? How did you preselect her and when did fix get in? Nothing a subpeona and Freedom of Information can't handle, if you don't.
Central location
This announcement brings up a very simple change that could increase public participation with boards, commissions, and the city council. That is, move the public hearings to a building in Town Center. Equip that space with the latest in electronic communications equipment so that citizens could call in, send e-mails or use social networks, to inform members of the deliberating body on the spot. Of course Cox could continue to cover the hearings on their network, and the citizens could attend these meetings and drive there in relative safety and convenience. Frankly, Princess Anne is just too far away from the center of the population of the city, and with the Greenline, and with urban infill and multi use development, the center is likely to move northward, not toward the old county. Time for this change now.
I agree with Brian about
I agree with Brian about Town Center. Now that the citizens have been stuck with the bill for this place, it may as well make money to pay it back rather than government use it for nothing. As for meetings, how about televised meetings, call-ins and emails soliciting comments for all the shadow government HR entities like chambers of commerce, MPO, and light rail?
Private or Public?
Mike, you know I'd love to agree with you, but Town Center was pitched, and should as much as possible remain, a center for private sector economic development.
Government buildings, government functions and government jobs do not need to absorb prime real estate such as Town Center.
Perhaps nearby, I wouldn't be as opposed, but the point of Town Center was not to give government the best digs in the city and hand the taxpayers the bill.