News-Record.com

Doug,

Here's another fragment. What was the sentencing for Lowe II's partner in crime?

MD

It's coming up later this morning, I believe.

Doug,

I understand your point about a desired unanimous vote on some levels, but I'm not sure that that was necessary or even preferable. I'll explain what I mean in a minute.

I appreciated reading your post in support of Maurice Green because I only caught the end of his public comments. I saw all of Shirley Prince's, and I was very impressed by what she said. I can't recall anything that she said that made me worry about her as a candidate, and she said many things that made me respond very positively to her. If his public-forum responses are replayed, I hope to hear them also.

Had I heard all of his responses, I might have had the same reaction you had: feeling that he was the best candidate for the school board to choose. Having read your support for his candidacy and knowing that I value your opinions, I'm inclined to believe that the board had two positive choices, at least based on the impressions they made. I'm also even more curious to see if I have a similar reaction after hearing all of his comments.

It sounds like a vote was made first on Shirley Prince, and it failed. You suggest that her supporters then should have thrown their support to Maurice Green. But had the votes been switched and Maurice Green not received enough votes in the first round, would his supporters have automatically supported Shirley Prince? Should either side even have been expected to switch their votes in such a manner? I'm not sure.

It's great when a vote turns out to be unanimous, but when it doesn't turn out that way, I'm not sure that that's necessarily a negative.

Maurice Green knows that the school board selected him, but he also knows that he was not the first choice of all school board members. His job will not be and should not be to please everyone at the same time, but he does have a responsibility to develop relationships with the entire board and try as much as possible to represent all of our school system's stakeholders. Knowing that not everyone supported him as the top candidate, Maurice Green will be reminded of the trust he must build and the relationships he must develop. Coming into the position with a degree of humility, ultimately combined with confidence, strikes me as potentially positive.

Instead of suggesting that all school board members should have voted for Maurice Green, I would instead suggest that the greater obligation is for all of us now to welcome and embrace his selection as the superintendent. The vote was what everyone was waiting for, but now that it has been taken, just as in a presidential election, we have a duty to be openminded and give Maurice Green a fair chance to prove himself. We should try to abandon any biases we may have had toward Shirley Prince, and we should discard any negative thoughts about Green's selection. Continuing any debates about his selection at this point is fruitless and pointless.

As a teacher, I'm very hopeful that our board made the best decision, and I'm looking forward to discovering how Maurice Green will lead us. I'm openminded, and I would suggest that that would be a good way for everyone to look at his selection, at least until he's given the chance really to prove himself. Being selected is only a very, very, very minor accomplishment. What he does from this day forward is what will ultimately really matter and make a difference, hopefully a very positive one.

Sincerely,

Hardy

Thanks, Hardy. I hope Green will support teachers and principals as strongly as he promises.

Jeff Belton, who attended last night's meeting via telephone, voted against hiring Green but then pledged to support him -- very appropriate.

My thought was that, because four members already were on record as favoring Prince as their first choice, it would be a nice move on their part to vote for the inevitable choice. Of course, it's possible some of them simply didn't believe he was qualified to lead the system. If so, I certainly hope they're wrong because we're signing him to a four-year contract worth well more than $1 million.

Let me add something I noted with irony listening (on TV) to the board's discussion last night.

Several spoke about Green taking GCS to the next level, or creating a better climate within the system. Some mentioned the fear teachers and principals had about speaking out during the last administration. One said the system has been going around in circles.

The irony? These same board members gave Terry Grier high marks, and rewarded him with a very steep salary increase last year, for his work.

Green speaks very impressively about setting high expectations and demanding excellence. I hope the board was listening and will take him up on that. He should be held accountable. We don't want to hear the board proclaim a few years from now that it's hiring another new superintendent who will finally take the system to the next level.

Doug, I can't say I'm surprised. That's the type of leadership (or lack thereof) that we've come to expect from the Guilford County Board of Education.

If they had such reservations about the Terry Grier administration, why didn't they voice them when he was superintendent? Why did they continually give him pay raise after pay raise? Why did they turn a deaf ear to the teachers who were raising these concerns? I can't understand it at all.

I wish I could feel good about this hire, but I can't. Mr. Green certainly is saying the right things and I wish him well. But I have so little confidence in the people doing the hiring. They haven't gotten much right so far, so it's hard for me to believe they've gotten it right this time, even if Mr. Green has done nothing personally to deserve that level of skepticism.

Does that make sense?

Doug? Noting irony in the actions or words of the GCS board? Doug, you're walking on some slippery rocks. Best stay in the shallow water before you get too deep. Might be easier to contemplate a smile on a dog or muse on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Thanks for the advice, Savage.

js, your skepticism makes sense. Green has to prove himself, first by spending a lot of time listening and learning as he promises.

For a strongly worded warning, see Jeff Taylor's comment on yesterday's post about Green.

I wish Attorney Green all the best in his new position. And a lot of luck. He will need it.

It is a curious choice. I cannot comment on Mr. Green's performance until I see our esteemed counselor-turned-superintendent in action.

Comparing his CV to Ms. Prince, Attorney Green has virtually zero education background. He has only been employed by the CMS since 2001. He has only been deputy super since 2006 (not even 2 years on the job).

Ms. Prince on the other hand is a lifelong educator who has actually held the reins as the person in charge of a school system. True, it's not as big as ours. But since when is that a pre-requisite? Have all our previous supers come from huge school systems?

It's obvious why Mo Green, ESQ got the votes of the Hayes-Childs-Quick bloc. Their motives are as transparent as their words and deeds are moronic. But Duncan, Cooke, Routh and the eternally embarrasing Kearns have a deeper motive than just the simplistic "diversity" canard.

By hiring Counselor Green, they have a superintendent who is a blank slate on which they can design whatever they please. With Ms. Prince, a veteran superintendent with a reputation of being hands-on, the School Board would have had to face a situation that would make them distinctly uncomfortable. It's called accountability.

At first blush, it would appear that the School Board botched another one.

Thank heavens that Kearns is out after this year. Childs too. I mean, come on does that guy have a brain?

Enough is enough!

That will be Mendenhall, Kearns, Childs and Grier gone.

Its a new era for GC. Lets not lose sight of that very positive thought!

You forgot Marti Sykes - thank goodness she's no longer on the board.

Here's a question about Superintendent Green for you, Doug (and others): How much did race factor in the school board's decision?

I know GCS has never had an African-American superintendent. Was that a factor in hiring Green and, if so, how much?

Only the school board members themselves can answer that. It's hard to say what factors might have made Green and Prince the two finalists, because we aren't told who other top candidates were.

When it came down to Green or Prince, I did believe Green was the better. Honestly, though, I wondered whether I might have been guilty of some gender bias in thinking that Prince might not be tough enough for the Guilford job.