Ackerman in the (bad) news
The "smooth transition" of power over at the San Francisco school district is turning out to be anything but -- especially after a behind-closed-doors blowup between outgoing Superintendent Arlene Ackerman, her attorney and some school board members.The Chron followed up on 2/8 with the editorial, One chief too many
Clarity in leadership is essential for the functioning of any school district -- especially one such as San Francisco's, which faces multiple challenges.To this point the focus of the reporting had been on the question of who is in charge, and how was this going to work. The story has more recently focused on the expenses. On 2/9 Heather Knight wrote, Schools chief's credit conflict , Some commissioners call Ackerman's charges excessive:
Yet, beginning last week, the San Francisco schools have an "interim superintendent" as well as a "superintendent emeritus," both of whom are paid full-time salaries.
Outgoing San Francisco schools chief Arlene Ackerman racked up $45,625 in credit card charges in 2005 -- mostly in meals, airplane tickets and hotels -- which have been reimbursed by the San Francisco Unified School District at taxpayer expense.The $45K figure was misleading since some of the expenses were reimbursed. The district has actually paid $38K of that total. Tali Woodward did a better job of reporting this in Ackerman's hefty expense account
Records at the heart of Arlene Ackerman's most recent dispute with members of the San Francisco Board of Education show that the outgoing superintendent racked up more than $45,000 in expenses on a single Diner's Club corporate account during 2005. The charges include plane tickets, dozens upon dozens of meals, and a least nine stays in luxury hotels.As one sfschools poster said, "Moving on sounds good." With all of the important business on the BOE's docket, why are we still fighting last year's battles?
Several thousand dollars have been repaid to the district by nonprofit entities or by Ackerman herself, the records show, but the school district has picked up the vast majority of charges, totaling about $38,000, a preliminary analysis of roughly 250 pages of records shows. Ackerman has hired an attorney who specializes employment discrimination and is threatening to sue board members for "harassment," in part because of requests for these documents made late last month.
Labels: SFUSD Politics
3 Comments:
While I agree that we need to put this pettiness aside and move on, I still can't resist doing some media criticism.
I note that the (union-busting) Bay Guardian specifically blasts Ackerman for the cost of the trip to D.C. to accept the Broad award -- which was a $125,000 scholarship, earned based on her efforts, that went directly to SFUSD students.
The Chronicle coverage may have been a journalistic first in that Heather Knight had to do an expose on herself for violating the Chron's
ethics policy. By standard newspaper industry ethics, another reporter would have done the story. Clearly, a reporter is not supposed to do a story on an issue that she herself is involved in. (I am very well aware that this may not have been Heather's decision.)
And the BOE members who have
legitimately partaken of the hospitality at district-hosted functions and legitimately engaged in district-paid business travel then turned around and called the media to blast the hospitality and travel that they had accepted. The mind reels.
There's another interesting aspect in the Chronicle's exposing this,
in that Chron reporters who do on-the-road assignments have themselves in the past had to negotiate for adequate expense reimbursements. A key aspect is: What is the accepted professional standard of on-the-road living in their field? So, now the Chronicle is outing someone else for operating under the same standard that its own reporters have fought for -- for not staying at the Super-8 when their colleagues are at the Marriott? It's getting more surreal by the minute.
I don't know what theunion-busting) SFBG's standard of on-the-road
living is for ITS reporters -- youth hostels? -- so at least that's
probably not a case of sauce for the goose.
$$$$$$$$$
Ackerman vs. Rojas!?
$$$$$$$$$$
Even compared to the corrupt and discedited former Superintendent Bill Rojas' spending Ackerman's spending has been questionable and even outrageous.
For Rojas [at the height he reportedly spent some $21k/year in 1995 dollars]
In 1995 he made 15 business trips -[he may have been the chair of the council of great city schools at the time, like Ackerman is now.]
Ackerman seems to have traveled much much more at least during the 2005 year than rojas did 10 years earlier.
For some idea of the types of restaurants he dined at -
-- Since becoming superintendent, Rojas has put dozens of restaurant
bills on his district credit card, including: $189 at Vivande, $123 at Zuni Cafe, $147 at Sol y Luna, $146 at Miss Pearl's Jam House and $158 at Scoma's. The district has also picked up tabs at Stars, Postrio, Square One, Moose's, Hayes Street Grill and elsewhere.
Ackerman has different tastes but similar patterns.
for more info to compare -
PAGE ONE -- Questions on Rojas' Spending
S.F. school funds used on entertaining, 15 business trips
- Nanette Asimov, David Dietz, Chronicle Staff Writers
Friday, March 22, 1996
If Ackerman weren't leaving, I can see either looking at those credit card receipts and saying "hey, rein it in," or even getting upset enough to move to get rid of her if that seemed appropriate.
But she's on her way out the door!
The energy people are spending fine-tooth-combing her iced-tea-drinking habits and choice of dining companions could be going into working for kids and for schools. Creating this brouhaha at a time when it's utterly pointless is harming kids and harming our schools.
Post a Comment
<< Home