- - - - - - - Langley Free Press Welcomes Your Comments - - - - - - - - - Name Email URL is optional
What are ISP and SDBC but more importantly when is the wine & cheese party?
The information on the Wine and Cheese is on the School Board site under Foundation Key. It is happening on February 7th 6:45 pm at the Envision Financial Administration Centre. ISP stands for International student Program and SDBC is the School District Business Company.
There's nothing wrong with a wine and cheeze party really. Wine is a part of many peoples diet, and the wine at these parties could easily be supplied by local vintners(?). There's no point in having people attending these functions with a mopey face on.
The wine and cheese is not the issue. The issue is the manner in which they are advertising in the schools when there is policy stating otherwise.
The saying is what is good for the goose is good for the gander comes to mind. This organization is to be at arms length with the manner in which they conduct business. The school PAC's are not able to use the District site to advertise their fund raisers that have alcohol involved so why should this be allowed is the question.
To think a person needs alcohol to be happy is a sad state to be in Me Thinks. Especially when you are raising funds for children just the act of doing so should make most people have a happy face.That again is not the issue here though.
What price for democracy? Saving money is very important, but you keep going on about 2 less trustees. I wonder if having only 5 trustees would damage the democratic process. You’d have 2 less voices in the debate concerning education. If we’re going to go in that direction, why not blow up the whole system and put in regional boards like the in the health care system? There’s lots of money to be saved by doing that.
If you are going to amalgamate, how about amalgamating with Surrey school district.
If they follow process what damage could there be? My thought is that 5 most certainly can do what 7 are currently. Interested, your suggestion could be an option. I urge you to do the work involved. This board has never been open to a public debate except at election time. My definition of public debate is having open discussion with constituents. Any consultation opportunities have been controlled and guided in my opinion. Having 2 less trustees does not change the process it remains the same.
"Interested, your suggestion could be an option. I urge you to do the work involved.".... What work do you mean? I don't understand your comment.
I am referring to the considerable amount of leg work and paper work required to get your initiative going.
Like emailing your MLA is hard. ;^)
Yes Grover that is a start they will advise you what you can do.
Grover, if that is all that you are prepared to do then obviously there will be a corresponding level of result.
Your MLA will be able to inform you of the steps that you can choose to take to "work" on your initiative.
"My definition of public debate is having open discussion with constituents."... ss, what would that look like compared to what the present board is doing? I've read about the 'consultation' going on. what would you do different?
Can’t take a joke ss? Ouch. I've been told. ‘Don’t get involved if you can’t do the job full time’. You sound a little condescending ss, as does wishful. Is that how you do consultation?
Grover I encouraged you to get involved. Where in this is there mention of doing a full time job?
You should check first what is involved before you say someone is condescending. I was stating a fact for I have gone through the process.
In regards to Interested’s question I would suggest that there be an open public forum at the end to include the complete community of Langley/Aldergrove. To get a complete picture and to enable the public input. No where in the outline or proposed process being applied has this been taken into consideration.
With the expectation that the people with some of the answers be present, who that could be would be up for discussion.
Nice try. "To think a person needs alcohol to be happy is a sad state to be in Me Thinks. Especially when you are raising funds for children just the act of doing so should make most people have a happy face." Condescending.
LOL
Grover, "Like emailing your MLA is hard. ;^) '
A snide remark will get an appropriate level of response. Fact.
If you can dish it out.... you know how it goes.
At least Susan is prepared to put her convictions on the line and is prepared to work hard for it. She doesn't hide behind a screen name like you and me. Regardless of what I believe, I give her credit for that. Your comments certainly don't serve to elevate the level of discussion.
Absolutely right. Wishful could be Susan. Or a friend in cahoots. Impossible to say who’s who on the blogs. Hard to take anyone seriously who spends a lot of time on them, isn’t it? Goodnight all.
I guess that depends upon how you use it and how you define "a lot of time".
I think that the politically oppressed in certain countries who blog are serious. I take seriously those post secondary students and their professors who blog about a course, or lawyers about legal issues, or freelance news blogs, etc.
For some, blogging can generate a serious income. 
Hi wishful. I was asking some friends last night about ss. I'm told she has a close friend that assists alot. So your Naomi, right?
Interested,
Just a note for your consideration: some individuals remain anonymous on these blogs as a matter of self-preservation. In my case between my name and email anyone can figure out who I am. Wishful, on the other hand, may wish/need to remain anonymous. Except in special cases, as a matter of courtesy anonymous folk should not be "outed" in an open thread. Wishful may or may not be **** (won't use the name in case LFP redacts that part of your post) but in either case the person identified in your post may come in for criticisms and repercussions (possibly unwarranted if you have the wrong person).
Regards,
Improving the Public Consultation process on “Building the Future”
As stated earlier, the school district should have a final public forum, once all consultations are completed and recommendations have been received, that would include all the communities in Langley/Fort Langley/Aldergrove. The public would have an opportunity to ask questions and make suggestions at this forum. The other important component in this is to have the people with some knowledge present to be able to answer the questions.
Within the consultation framework, there should be an additional focus area that should be reviewed, which would encompass the School Board Office and all business activities and entities within the district, with a goal to improving the effective utilization of facilities and manpower. Immediately, a reduction of Senior Administrative positions, inclusive of the Trustee board as TWU has done, comes to mind - a reduction of four, from nine to five as “interested” has suggested.(on another feed). It makes very good business sense to me.
Interested...
Do I write like a woman to you?
Go Phish! But, you know what they say about curiosity. LOL
On a more serious note, I think that a public review of the School Board Offices and its non-school based operations is an excellent idea. It's common sense to look at the whole picture. Don't think the district will have the stomach for it though.
"Go Phish!" Yes that sounds like a woman to me. ;^)
You get my vote on a review of the School Board Offices and its non-school based operations though.
Commenting by HaloScan
