Bright Futures plan: The only thing missing is magic beans

One thing became crystal clear after watching the Joplin R-8 Board of Education meeting Tuesday night.

C. J. Huff's loyalists on the Bright Futures Advisory Board will do anything they can to keep Bright Futures from being accountable to our elected officials (and therefore to the taxpayers).

As far as the operation of Bright Futures is concerned, the Advisory Board has never been anything but window dressing receiving reports during its infrequent meetings about the success stories of the organization and statistics about how many student needs had been met.

That is not to say that board members have not been personally involved with Bright Futures. In many cases they have. But the direction of the organization had always been under the control of C. J. Huff.

And perhaps it still is.

The Advisory Board's sudden prominence coincides with Huff's departure as superintendent. Now that he is gone, the board has decided it is time to turn over control of the organization and the taxpayers' money to an outside entity, while leaving the day-to-day operation of Bright Futures  under the control of Huff's handpicked Advisory Board and the coordinator and assistant coordinator who are currently in place.

The only thing missing is magic beans.

The R-8 Board should reject any plan that allows Bright Futures to continue operating the way it has been. Consider what the board learned Tuesday night:

-561 students meet the requirement of being "food insecure kiddos" (Coordinator Melissa Winston's phrase, not mine) but the decision was made to provide snack packs for only 277 of those, the ones considered most "food insecure." Those who were "moderate food insecure" or who had "low food insecurity" had to do without.

-At the same time that 284 students were being rejected for snack packs, Bright Futures was paying rent and utilities for selected families.

-As of June 30, Bright Futures Joplin had $446,365 in its account, plenty of money to take care of its basic mission, but also enough, apparently, to cover the $35,000 salary of an assistant director once the grant for that position ran out. Thirty five thousand dollars will buy a lot of snack packs and/or meet a lot of student needs.

-The budget shown by CFO Paul Barr indicated Bright Futures spent $20,867 on student needs during 2014-2015. When you throw in benefits for Winston and her assistant, it appears the taxpayers are paying four times in salaries what Bright Futures is providing for student needs. And that does not include $8,890 that was listed for "operational expenses."

-Interim Superintendent Norm Ridder noted that Bright Futures needed to narrow its focus. While board member Gary Nodler seemed to indicate in a diplomatic fashion that the organization needed to get out of the business of paying for rent and utilities, the organization's impact has also been diffused by such feel good programs as Operation College Bound and the recent reading initiative. The idea of Bright Futures selling caramel apples so that elementary students can be taken on a visit to college campuses is an unnecessary distraction. Many of the people who I have seen praising Operation College Bound the most are those who already know the value of a college education and have every intention of making sure their children go. The trips, however, do not do a single thing to remove the poverty barriers that keep families from even considering sending their children to college. As for the reading initiative, it should be remembered that this was started after the Huff Administration eliminated the jobs of all part-time reading instructors.

During last night's meeting, R-8 board members appeared to be staunchly opposed to the idea of removing the hundreds of thousands of dollars from the district treasury and turning it over to the Community Foundation of the Ozarks. This has nothing to do with any lack of trust in the foundation. The foundation has a long and honorable record and it provided millions to Joplin after the tornado.

The board was clearly opposed to that idea and its attorney, Norman Rouse, also noted that the money had been given to the school district and should remain under the school district's control. "Abdicating that responsibility is not something I would advise," Rouse said.

Nor should the board turn over the operation of Bright Futures to an advisory board that is unaccountable to anyone. While those on the board are certainly well meaning, allowing Bright Futures to continue its rogue operation would be a disservice to the taxpayers, and more importantly, to the children of the Joplin R-8 School District.

Without school board approval, Bright Futures has already sent applications to parents asking them for private information about their family lives and incomes.

Nor did the board ever approve maintaining an assistant coordinator at a cost to the taxpayers of $35,000 after the grant money ran out.

Bright Futures does not answer to anyone.

For the past five years, Bright Futures has been operated as an untouchable fiefdom within the R-8 School District. It is time to turn the page on this reminder of the excesses of the C. J. Huff years. The Board of Education should maintain control, follow the example set by Webb City, East Newton, and McDonald County and sever ties with Bright Futures USA, and move toward a laser-like focus on meeting student needs, If an advisory board is needed, it should be one that is chosen by the elected Board of Education and not one that was handpicked by the former superintendent.

Turner books, thousands of others on sale this week at Always Buying Books

Copies of my books, including Silver Lining in a Funnel Cloud and No Child Left Alive, are on sale this week as well as thousands of others as Always Buying Books celebrates the 67th birthday of owner Bob Wolfe (which has two more minutes to go as I am writing this).

The birthday sale began last Friday and will continue through Saturday, October 31. All books will be discounted 10 to 50 percent with special savings on different categories of books each day, including children's books on Wednesday, mass market paperbacks on Thursday, and biography, true crime, and military history books on Friday.

A "surprise" is in store on Saturday, according to Bob's advertising.

Those bringing in books Wednesday will receive double credit, which must be used that day.

Daily giveaways of books, including signed books by local authors are scheduled.

Ridder to R-8 Board: It's time to focus on behavior

Interim Superintendent Norm Ridder told members of the Joplin R-8 Board of Education what district teachers have been saying for years.

"This is the first district where we have had to focus on behavior," Ridder said, referring to other districts in which he has worked.

"If we don't get our behavior in shape, we're going to have problems."

Ridder indicated he had come to this conclusion after meetings with parents and teachers. "The parents are frustrated," he said, and one source of that frustration is that discipline is applied differently at different schools within the district.

"We need to work on behavior immediately."

Ironically, shortly after Ridder said those words, part of the problem became evident as Jason Cravens, executive director of secondary instruction and Jennifer Doshier, executive director of elementary education, showed statistics about the number of referrals at district buildings.

The major criticism of discipline in the R-8 School District over the past few years is that the statistics are meaningless because teachers are pressured into not writing office referrals and when they do write them, often the students, no matter what the behavior, are back in the classroom before the hour was over.

Or systems were put in place such as the one we had for eighth grade at East Middle School during the 2012-2013 school year, my last year there, when students had to have four teacher referrals, then a parent had to be called, then the student had to receive two more referrals before he or she could be sent to the office.

Many times that eighth referral brought no action other than a conversation with the principal. We were told to send the student to the office for each referral after the eighth, but that was changed when some students began going to the office frequently. After that, we were told to "give the principal's intervention time to work."

That eighth referral was often the only one that counted as far as the school's statistics were concerned.

Data is completely misleading as far as school discipline is concerned.

But at least the focus is finally on one of the biggest problems facing the Joplin R-8 School District

(Note: The photo is not from Joplin, but from England.)

C. J. Huff dropped as defendant in Jane Doe lawsuit

An amended complaint was filed by lawyers for Jane Doe and her children today adding Joplin R-8 Interim Superintendent Norm Ridder as a defendant in a First Amendment lawsuit brought on by a North Middle School field trip to Victory Ministries and Sports Complex in May.

Former Superintendent C. J. Huff is no longer a defendant.

Court records indicate that Huff was shown a consent form (pictured above) that was given to North students which said, "We understand that the officers, officials, agents, other participants and employees of Victory Ministry and Sports Complex may be inviting me or my (our) students to Bible studies or local churches of the Christian faith. While at any Victory Ministry and Sports Complex location or event (my) our students has permission to participate in worship services, Bible studies, or any other activities that may pertain to the Christian faith."

When this was brought to Huff's attention along with the strong possibility that legal action might be filed, Huff responded as follows:

Thank you for your email regarding your concerns over the field trip to Victory Gym. The trip is a celebration for the hard work the students did this year. The students voted for this location. The activities and approaches are completely secular in nature. The permission slip was the standard waiver of Victory Gym. We have not had any parents contact us about concerns, but if they do, we will assure them the secular nature of the trip. Your email brings a good point for us to review the waivers of locations better so our communication can be clearer. I believe removing the language on the waiver would have created more clarity and removed the confusion for the parents regarding the nature of the trip. Definitely something for us to be diligent towards in the future. Thank you, again. CJ

R-8 executive directors eliminate Academic All-Stars

Academic All-Stars, a staple of the Joplin R-8 School District for years, will  not be held this year.

That decision was made over the summer, apparently by a committee which included the executive directors of elementary and secondary instruction.

At least that was the way it sounded when the people who hold those positions, Jennifer Doshier and Jason Cravens, hemmed and hawed their way through a presentation to the Board of Education tonight.

The executive directors, who have held the responsibility of organizing Academic All-Stars, said that surveys indicated parents did not want academic all-stars, though they were vague about what those surveys had entailed.

Who made the decision?

:There were five or seven of us," Doshier said, though she did not offer any further details.

The only reason mentioned for the parental disapproval of Academic All-Stars was that some parents were upset because they could not hear their children's names being mentioned during the ceremony because of people who were leaving.

When was the decision made?

Cravens said, "We did it this summer."

Academic All-Stars will be replaced by celebrations at each school, the executive directors said. From their disjointed presentation, it also appears that honor rolls will also not be celebrated. Instead, different celebrations will be held each quarter. The first one will reward attendance and proper behavior, while the second and third will continue to recognize those things as well as how well students perform on the $300,000 testing regimen, the executive directors and Curriculum Director Sarah Stephens talked the board into buying earlier this year.

Reiboldt: Gateway Arch is one of nation's most identifiable landmarks

(From Rep. Bill Reiboldt, R-Neosho)

On Wednesday, October 28, the St. Louis Gateway Arch will celebrate its 50th birthday. It was on this day in 1965 that the last section of the 630 ft. monument was inserted to join together the two legs of the Arch, a project that was completed “within budget and without loss of a single life.” On that October day, the then vice-president of the United States, Hubert H. Humphrey, was watching from a helicopter hovering near the Arch as that last section was put into place. He commented, “The Arch is to the West, and to the future…a soaring curve in the sky that links the rich heritage of yesterday and the richer future of tomorrow.” His words spoken fifty years ago could be just as appropriate today.

In celebrating the Arch’s fiftieth anniversary, the Jefferson National Expansion Memorial, one of our national parks, is currently undergoing a $380 million renovation. The structure was built as a monument to the vision of Thomas Jefferson, our nation’s third president, and to the role that the city of St. Louis played in the westward expansion of the United States.

The Jefferson National Expansion Memorial became a part of the National Park Service in 1935, but the purpose of building the memorial was to commemorate westward expansion and to help revitalize the St. Louis riverfront. To do this a “nationwide design competition” was conducted in the late 1940s. It was at that time that the stainless steel arch design created by Eero Saarinen (who, unfortunately, died of a cerebral hemorrhage before work on the structure even began) was chosen. Excavation began in 1961 and the project was completed in the fall of 1965. At ground level, the structure is 630 feet between the outer sides of its two legs, and each base is 54 feet wide. The width at the top is 17 feet, and there are 142 stainless steel sections. The depth of each foundation is 64 feet deep. Total weight of the Arch is over 17,000 tons. The original cost was $13,420,168, but the grand total spent for the complete area of development was over $51 million. The Arch is designed to sway as much as 18 inches and can withstand an earthquake; yet it takes a 50 mph wind to make it move even one and one-half inches.

Shortly after Thomas Jefferson became president in 1801, and understanding the importance of New Orleans to the new nation, he approached the French government in an effort to purchase the Port of New Orleans. Under the leadership of Napoleon Bonaparte, France offered to sell the Louisiana Territory to the United States because they needed money to finance their war effort in Europe. In April of 1803, the United States completed the Louisiana Purchase at a $15 million price tag. This was a massive territory that effectively doubled the size of the American republic, adding 828,000 square miles (or 530 million acres of land) to the nation, at a cost of less than three cents per acre. Today, this territory makes up all or part of fifteen states, stretching from the Mississippi River to the Rocky Mountains—not including the state of Texas or parts of New Mexico. After the purchase in 1804, President Jefferson commissioned the famous Lewis and Clark team to explore the new territory. It was from St. Louis that they set out on their dangerous journey.

Founded by the French in 1764, St. Louis was an important city. Even before the Louisiana Purchase, it was known as the Gateway to the West because of its strategic location on both the Mississippi and the Missouri Rivers. St. Louis was a major city for wagon trains carrying people to and from the West, as well as a key point in the growing fur trade industry. The Missouri territory was established in 1812 and admitted to the Union in 1821 as a part of the Missouri Compromise.

The “Jewel of St. Louis” (the Arch) stands as a reminder of westward expansion and St. Louis’ role in that effort, though its presence today seems to transcend time itself. It commemorates the pioneering spirit and the determination of the early Americans, yet it stands as a testament to modern technology and masterful engineering. The Arch has enticed millions of visitors to view its splendor and has become one of our nation’s most identifiable landmarks.

Graves: The president needs to be held accountable for Obamacare

(From Sixth District Congressman Sam Graves)

Americans by and large have been disappointed with the results of Obamacare. Premiums have risen, small businesses have scaled back hiring, and many who liked their previous health care plans have been forced to give them up.

The House of Representatives has worked to protect Americans from the blow backs of Obamacare. Unfortunately, we have seen all of these attempts blocked by the President’s allies in the Senate.

Budget reconciliation provides us with our best opportunity to get a bill that repeals Obamacare through the Senate and onto the President's desk. Bills brought up under the budget reconciliation process require only a simple majority to pass the Senate.

Last week, the House of Representatives worked to pass an Obamacare reconciliation bill. The bill repeals individual and employer mandates, eliminates the Independent Payment Advisory Board, and kills all taxes on life saving medical devices. Without these parts of the law – particularly the individual and employer mandates – Obamacare will not stand.

Rather than have another attempt to repeal Obamacare die in the Senate, this budget reconciliation bill will make it to President Obama's desk. With the American people overwhelmingly unhappy with the law, the President needs to be held accountable for his stubborn defense of Obamacare.

Watch the Joplin R-8 Board of Education live at 7 p.m.

ACLU fighting city of Springfield to free women's nipples

A Springfield woman and an organization called "Free the Nipple- Springfield Residents Promoting Equality filed a lawsuit against the City of Springfield today in U. S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri battling what they see as the injustice that allows men to display their nipples in public, but not women.

Standing behind Jessica Lawson and Free the Nipple- Springfield Residents Promoting Equality is the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

According to the petition, the group held protests against the ordinance in Springfield's Park Central Square August 7 and August 23, with group members complying with the law by marching topless with an opaque covering over the nipples, including the men in the group who covered their nipples out of solidarity. The city of Springfield responded in such a way that breastfeeding now violates city ordinance.

In response to that protest, Defendant repealed its previous ordinance and enacted a replacement. The new ordinance makes it a crime in Springfield to show “one’s genitals, buttocks, vulva, pubic hair, pubic area[,] or the female breast below a point immediately above the top of the areola, for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification or which is likely to cause affront or alarm[.]” However, Defendant now exempts from this regulation “exposure of the female breast necessarily incident to breast-feeding an infant” and “performances of adult entertainment.” 

Plaintiffs challenge Springfield’s ordinance insofar as it criminalizes their expressive conduct, treats women differently than men by subjecting them to inferior legal status and criminalizing their expression based on their sex, and criminalizes the expression of breast milk and certain exposure of the female breast related to breast-feeding. 

In the lawsuit, the group attempts to explain what it sees as the hypocrisy of Springfield's ordinance:

In Plaintiffs’ view, the Springfield ordinance was discriminatory against girls and women by making it a crime to show their nipples in any place where they might be viewed by others while allowing boys and men to show their nipples at any time or place without fear of arrest or prosecution. 16. The development of male and female breasts is the same from fetus until puberty. Beginning at puberty, breast development stops for most males and continues for most females. As a result, for most males, the breasts’ ducts do not develop lobules or glands, and, for most women, they do. Both the male and female breasts have ducts, fat, sweat glands, nipples, and areolae. The new Springfield ordinance was sponsored by councilman Justin Burnett. According to the lawsuit,

The city council advanced three reasons for its new regulation of women: 

a. Springfield has worked to be a “family friendly” tourist spot, and the breasts of women undermine this mission; 

b. Protests might have underage participants and, should any of those underage participants be girls that reveal a portion of their breasts, someone might take a picture and show it to others, intentionally or accidentally disseminating child pornography; and 

c. The reasons advanced by the city council demonstrate that the ordinance is in response to and targets the August protests.

 The reasons advanced by the city council demonstrate that the ordinance’s purpose is to perpetuate stereotypes about girls and women and is a response to the council’s apparent view that the breasts of women are primarily objects of sexual desire. 

Although advanced as a safeguard against moral decay, Council Bill No. 2015-227 eliminates § 78-222’s restriction on covered male genitalia such that men are now permitted to show their “covered genitals in a discernibly turgid state.”

The petition notes that Lawson is currently breastfeeding her one-year-old and now "must choose between risking arrest and imprisonment or foregoing the breast-feeding of  (her child) or the expression of breast milk in places open to public view because those actions may subject (her) to arrest and imprisonment.

The four-count lawsuit is seeking an injunction against the enforcement of the ordinance, a permanent injunction, damages, and attorney fees.

(Springfield News Leader photo)

Norm Ridder to be named as defendant in First Amendment lawsuit

Another mess that C. J. Huff has left for Norman Ridder to clean up.

A motion filed today in U. S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri indicates that Superintendent Norm Ridder will be named as a defendant in a lawsuit filed by a woman known only as "Jane Doe" who claims her children's First Amendment rights were violated when North Middle School took a field trip to Victory Ministries and Sports Complex in May.

The lawsuit was initially filed against Huff and North Middle School Principal Brandon Eggleston. Eggleston will continue to be a defendant, but since Huff is no longer superintendent of the district, Ridder will be named as the substitute defendant if the judge, as expected, allows an amended complaint to be filed.

Doe filed the lawsuit on behalf of her children, one in middle school, and the other in elementary school.
The lawsuit claims the older child was "exposed to defendants' promotion and endorsement of religion" and "felt coerced by the school to participate in religious activity and has been made to feel like an outsider and unwelcome in the school district." The younger child will be a student at North, the lawsuit says, and the parent does not want any further such activity to be sponsored by the district.

The situation that brought about the lawsuit was explained as follows:

On or about May 8, 2015, a class field trip of students from North Middle was taken, during regular school hours, to a facility owned and operated by a Christian ministry. The facility in question is known as Victory Ministries and Sports Complex, and is located in Joplin, Missouri.

Victory Ministries and Sports Complex (hereinafter “Victory”) is a Christian facility that operates for three stated purposes that are expressed on its web site: “Exalt Jesus,” and “Expand the Kingdom of God,” and “Equip the Body of Christ.”

The same web page states Victory’s goals, which include: “Keep Jesus central in everything we do,” and “Have God-honoring entertainment,” and other religious goals. Christian imagery is prominent at the Victory facility. Most, if not all signs that include the “Victory” name at the facility utilize a Christian cross as the “t” in the word “Victory.”

A large banner that exalts Jesus is visible at the Victory gym. The banner, which states “Jesus is worthy of it all!” is placed high on the wall of the gym, above approximately ten other banners, many of which also contain religious messages. One banner, for example, reads “ Worship” whereas another states: “Hope. The confident expectation that what God has promised is true.”

Prior to the field trip, permission slips were sent home to parents for the school field trip to Victory. Doechild I was given a permission slip for Plaintiff Jane Doe to sign. The permission slip for parents to sign in order to allow students to attend the field trip expressly stated that parents understand that their children may be invited to Bible studies and local churches while at Victory. The same permission slip, in paragraph number 6, required parents to allow their child to participate in “worship services, Bible studies or any other activities that may pertain to the Christian faith.”

On May 5, 2015, an email was sent by American Humanist Association (“AHA”), a Washington, D.C. nonprofit organization, to Defendants Huff and Eggleston warning them that a North Middle School parent had raised concerns about the planned field trip and pointing out that the trip would violate the Establishment Clause. That same day, Defendant Huff responded to AHA’s email with an email of his own denying that the trip violated the Establishment Clause but admitting that the permission slip was inappropriately worded.

Also that same day, in response to Defendant Huff’s email, the AHA sent a second email to Defendants, drawing specific attention to the religious nature of the Victory operation and warning that the field trip would result in litigation.

Defendants did not respond to said email, and in fact, the trip was conducted on or about May 8. Doechild I did not participate in the field trip, which was conducted during an ordinary school day. Plaintiff Jane Doe, faced with the choice of an unconstitutional field trip or no school for her child for the day, kept Doechild I out of school. As such, Doechild I was denied a full day of academics due to Defendants’ actions. If Doechild I had participated in the field trip, Doechild I would have been exposed to Christian messages that directly contradict the religious beliefs of Plaintiff Jane Doe and Doechild I.

The field trip has given the impression to a reasonable observer that the public school endorses Christianity. Doechild I was put in the position of having to choose to attend a religious school-sponsored event or forgo participation entirely. Public school resources, including paid personnel time and other resources, which were paid for by tax monies, were expended in planning and conducting the field trip to Victory.

The lawsuit asks for a permanent injunction against any further trips to Victory Sports Complex or any other religious-based venues, a judgment that school officials have violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, and damages and punitive damages for violating the children's constitutional rights.

The attorneys for the plaintiffs are Arthur Benson & Associates of Kansas City.