And justice for all

Sending the Amherst Select Board to a "social justice training session" is like requiring a professional All-Star baseball team to attend a Little League summer training camp. Talk about preaching to the converted. Yikes!



And some of you may remember Dr. Barbara Love, UMass School of Education, who in 2002, as Chair of the Amherst Regional School Committee, played the race card to defend the pedophile principal Steven Myers as incendiary news broke about his pernicious interaction with a 15-year-old Amherst student: "As a black woman, I am leery of jumping to conclusions and condemning and convicting an individual on the basis of circumstantial evidence."

That same year, when school officials were discussing whether to disregard the state mandate that will require students to pass the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System test to receive a diploma, the Daily Hampshire Gazette noted that " ... Chairwoman Barbara Love countered that it is equally important to teach students to defy laws they find unconscionable."

Yes, by all means, sit down in the middle of the road to protest the MCAS. God forbid we test students to see whether their expensive education instills learning or not.

The private Kellogg Foundation (those purveyors of the "breakfast of champions") provided the $300,000 "social justice" grant to Amherst over three years to fund this auspicious project, so no taxpayer money was involved. Unlike the $96,000 Amherst schools recently donated to the Umass School of Education for tips on how to teach.

The Denver Westword News reported:

"December 7th, 1941, a date which will.."

"Some fine Sunday morning..." Colonel Billy Mitchell (1924)

“I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.”
Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto (12/7/41)


“With confidence in our armed forces - with the unbounded determination of our people - we will gain the inevitable triumph - so help us God.” (12/8/41)
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Ace Amherst Schools, noncompliant?

According to the state Department Of Education: Traditional study halls are not considered "directed" or "independent" study solely because of the presence of a teacher in the room.

Last year Northampton High School had no mandated study halls while Amherst Regional High School had two. Even the diffident Regional School Committee voted down Principal Jackson's suggestion to up it to three study halls.

Meanwhile Northampton's overhead per student that year was only $11,699, below the $13,062 state average; Amherst's platinum plated Regional schools spent a whopping $16,909 per student--well above state average.

So even if principal Mark Jackson--Amherst's 2nd highest paid town employee--is correct that "directed study hall counts towards the state mandated time in learning," that still means the venerable Amherst schools barely beat (by only 3%) bare minimum state standards (990 hours) while spending almost 30% more.

For Champagne prices we should be able to avoid Piels beer performance.

Principal Mark Jackson is defending the warehousing of kids as long as a qualified teacher (the more qualified, the higher the salary) is sitting up front acting as baby sitter, rather than simply a responsible warm body.

If no actually teaching is taking place, what difference does it make? It would be lot cheaper to use para professionals. Or maybe we could get some volunteer grad students from the Umass School of Education.


And no, as of this evening Mr. Jackson has not provided a state legal source confirming that a certified teacher makes all the difference with study halls.

When you play with fire

Pelham Police Chief Ed Fleury. Photo by Izzy Lyman (2003)

At my age, having seen and experienced a most traumatic moment or two, and still only an intermediate ranked father (green belt in karate terms) when it comes to child rearing, I simply cannot imagine anything even remotely worse than witnessing your child's head explode from the point blank impact impact of machine gun bullets gone awry.

So I wholeheartedly agree with former Pelham Police Chief Ed Fleury's lawyers attempt to quash the presentation at his manslaughter trial of video taken by the dead child's father at that most horrific moment. And I shudder to think the number of "hits" it would generate if it somehow was leaked to the Internet (WikiLeaks perhaps?)

But I don't disagree with Edward P. Ryan Jr., a defense lawyer and former president of the Massachusetts Bar Association who said the video would probably be allowed because "It depicts the gun in operation. It could help the jury make a determination as to whether or not allowing the boy to fire the weapon is wanton or reckless," he said. "They get to see the circumstances under which the gun was fired."

Fair enough. But even I--a lowly blogger using a $35 shareware digital editing program--could edit that video in a fair-and-balanced way, showing the gun in operation but stopping just short of "the horror...the horror."

As I said on this blog exactly two years ago:

Of course the DA is quoted saying that Machine Gun Shoots are "clearly a violation of the law.” Well gee Mr. DA, where the Hell were you over the past few years when these things having been routinely promoted—and I mean PROMOTED—in this state?

It’s not like they were secretly holding cock fighting in a basement somewhere. If you did your job and shut these events down a year ago that child would be alive today.

If you are going to indict somebody then how about the father who picked out the gun? Or your office for dereliction of duty.

The jury will never convict. But another life has been destroyed.


If, however, the judge allows that indescribable death video at trial--the jury will convict...the wrong man!

The AP reports

Merry Maple lighting 2010

Merry Maple. Tony Maroulis, Amherst Chamber of Commerce Executive Director recording the auspicious moment on his iphone

Yes folks, that's it. The (in)famous Merry Maple. Only in Amherst.

It's beginning to look at lot like Christmas...

Ahhhhh, the Merry Maple--not to be confused with Christmas Tree--lighting ceremony tomorrow in town center (although not nearly the same without Umass superstar marching band leader George Parks, may he rest in peace) and the Boy Scouts selling Christmas trees on the north end of town as they have done for over 60 years.

God bless us everyone!

Oldie but Goodie (and naturally you read it here first)

One sided "partnership"

Umass is obviously the largest employer in Western Massachusetts (a good thing) and the second largest landowner in Amherst--almost all of it tax exempt (not such a good thing).

The School of Education deals in, obviously, education. So I'm trying to figure out why Amherst would give UMass $96,000 (half of it going to a lone Professor) to help the academics do what is, essentially, their job?

And no, the fact that most of it is American Recovery and Reinvestment Act money is not a good enough answer.

The main reason Umass gave the town free use of Mark's Meadow school for so many years is because they viewed it as a "living laboratory" for their graduate students, and it allowed professors to design real world curriculum for the School of Education. So why are we now paying a grad students $34,000 for essentially that same thing?

Good local schools are a top priority for a potential professor or grad student with a family deciding whether to come to Umass. Speaking of which, Amherst taxpayers already subsidize the annual full cost of public education (over $16,000 per head) for the 50 or 60 school age children who live under a Umass tax-exempt roof.

A "collaboration" should be a two-way street, not a gilded yellow brick road.

Copy of the $96,000 contract

The Amherst Bulletin reports (better late than never)


My original report.

Amherst Schools positive spin