Comments on: Lovenburg seeks second term on school board

By: Rich Rifkin

Rich Rifkin — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 03:18:59 +0000

Scott, I have noticed your endless stream of hatred toward me. That’s your right. But don’t count on me leaving Davis. I came here in 1965 and have no plans to leave.

As it happens, in the neighborhood where you live, I used to play with my childhood friends back in the late ’60s and throughout the 1970s. Back then, your property was a tomato field. We had wars firing rotten tomatoes at each other. And we waded in the culverts.

By: Daniel Segel

Daniel Segel — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 00:39:33 +0000

She’s been on the School Board for 5 years. Is that not “in the trenches” enough for you? Is there anybody else running who has more direct experience working on school issues?

Since you’re so upset about the lack of competing candidates, when can we expect you to announce your candidacy?

By: Barbara Archer

Barbara Archer — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 00:34:12 +0000

I agree with wdf1. Volunteer work is invaluable to our community and requires a lot of savvy, maybe even more savvy than paid work. However, in addition to her large amount of volunteer work, Susan is also an elected official going on 5 years of dedicated service to our community where she has indeed “worked in the trenches” on fiscal and school program policy for DJUSD.

By: wdf1

wdf1 — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 23:02:38 +0000

“She definitely does not listen to people and does not gather information from the community.”

That is definitely not true. She has reached out to critics of the school board & district to see where there might be the possibility of accommodation. Also, if you watch her in school board meetings, you would see that she is very prepared and has done her homework on the issues.

“…she has done basically nothing except volunteer…”

Actually she has done more than just volunteer. But I wonder why you find PTA, school volunteer work minimally justifiable, here? That minimizes the valuable work of a lot of school volunteers in this city.

By: wdf1

wdf1 — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 20:50:54 +0000

This comment seems way over the top given the context of the meeting that you reference.

I reviewed the May 3 school board meeting that I think you refer to. I invite you to do so as well: http://www.djusd.tv/content/may-3rd-2012-school-board-meeting, the last third of the board meeting.

Lovenburg stated an opinion at the appropriate time that Chinese language was an important offering in the district (not a controversial view given the size and economic strength of China and Davis’ location near the Pacific Rim). The situation was that the board was considering not offering Chinese I next year, but offering German I. Lovenburg made her comment out of concern that Chinese not be dismissed in importance, not that Chinese was somehow better than German.

As board president, she also had to run a meeting with a very full agenda that was running late and still had other items that had to be voted on that evening. In response to that she cut the time for public speaking from 2 minutes to 1 minute after a number of German I advocates had spoken. It is board president’s prerogative to do so. She let several speakers run over the 1 minute limit. And she did interrupt a couple of Chinese I advocates to finish up. Everyone else self-monitored their time. It looked fair to me under the time constraints of the meeting. She was about as polite as one can be under the circumstances.

And in the end, Chinese I and German I are scheduled to be offered, so what ax are you grinding, here?

I have found Lovenburg to be a very prepared board member who always has relevant questions and points to raise to clarify issues to the public.