User profile

currentteacher

Perhaps Ms. Mary Anne Miller should review:

NRS 386.240 Qualifications of trustees. A candidate for the office of trustee of a school district shall:
1. Be a qualified elector.
2. Have the qualifications of residence within the county school district required for the office for which he seeks election.

The above are the only requirements to hold a seat on any school board of trustees in the state of Nevada. I don't see any restriction relating to a trustee's employment. Surely, the founders of the State of Nevada would have included such a clause had they considered it a disqualifying factor to hold this elected office.

What Ms. Miller is correct in stating is the fact that back in 1996 the attorney general's opinion regarding Rosenberg serving as a university regent is specific in nature, narrow in scope, and only applies to Rosenberg being seated as a university regent. However, Ms. Miller's failed to advance the fact that the statute the attorney general cited back in 1996 and used to arrive at her opinion regarding Rosenberg being seated as a regent is still on the books and is just as valid today as it was back in 1996. If elected, Taylor should only have to request the current attorney general for another opinion based upon that particular statute as well as the precedent that was set back in 1996 and Rosenberg's subsequent 12 year tenure as a regent while concurrently maintaining a full-time professorship within the university system. Interesting enough, I cannot recall any difficulty with Rosenberg's service overseeing the administration of the University of Nevada system while being employed by that same system. I do recall when Rosenberg stood up to Jim Rogers when Rogers threw one of his patented childish tantrums when he didn't get his own way on an issue. Kudos to Mr. Rosenberg and I have no reason to believe that Mr. Taylor would not follow in his footsteps in this regard when excising the educational malignancy our school district is currently afflicted with.

What is the difference between Rosenberg serving on the Board of Regents and Taylor serving on the CCSD Board of Trustees? Neither of these positions negotiate employee contracts, they simply sign off on them. As far as the CCSD administration working for an employee, perhaps that isn't such a bad idea. For sure, Taylor knows where the money ISN'T going and I'll wager he is well aware of the abuses currently running rampant by an unchecked CCSD administration and ineffective Teacher's Association. On second thought, I do see an ethics problem but it is not with Taylor serving on the School Board it is with those currently serving on the Board that have allowed the education of our kids to sink to the level that it has. I would imagine that the real power brokers in the School District will pull out all the stops to keep Taylor off of the School Board as he knows too much, specifically how the "system" works (or doesn't work) and just by who and how it has been exploited for personal gain and/or the gain of close associates. Wouldn't it make sense to put someone on the School Board that earned their stripes in the trenches working with your kids rather than someone that thinks it simply would be fun and actually believe that a couple of part-time years of PTA experience is more than adequate to qualify them to lead the 5th largest school district in the nation. Well, I have to admit the PTA experience is a superior qualification when compared to some currently serving or recently prohibited from running for re-election to a School Board seat. Maybe it just depends on which church you attend or don't attend.