skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Throughout most of my career I have been applying techniques from Industrial Psychology to help large software development teams improve their productivity and, more importantly, stop making serious mistakes. I am usually called in when there have been a few disasters and the project is in risk of failing. Sometimes it does fail and there is nothing that I, nor anyone else, can do about it. Fortunately, there are also times when process improvement can play a vital role in helping to bring a project to success. Overcoming resistance to change is the first skill that anyone in the process improvement field must understand and learn to use as an effective tool. Read on if the coming year is your time to help bring about effective change, for the better, in your organization.
Please keep those process guys away from me...
I admit that I have really learned to dislike many of my colleagues who are in the profession of applying software process improvement in business settings. Too often I find these folks have no clue as to what really works in the real world. They are too preoccupied with their metrics (used to sell their methodologies) and often have rather light technical backgrounds. In my career I have been happiest when no one wants to listen to my expertise on process improvement and I get to sit in the back, as a systems engineer or SA and tweek Unix kernels (what fun!). But then somebody really screws up a software release and I am back to being in charge of CM and Release Management.
A good rule of thumb, is that the bigger the disaster, the more that the organization will be ready for change. This is not an accident. Kurt Lewin proposed one of the classic models for change back in 1951 which consisted of three simple stages: Unfreeze - Move -Refreeze. Watts Humphrey, among others, talks about this model and most of us have a very hard time applying it in practice. Most of us feel frustrated in organizations that have problems and we may even start to believe that nothing will ever change for the better. That may be true and some organizations, just like in biology, some organisms will die from their own organizational diseases. Yet many more will find the catalyst for making things better. Are you up for being the Change Agent in your company?
The first step is in realizing that everything around you is part of an ecosystem (this is a classic Organizational Development model for understanding what is happening). There are ecosystems in nature that are very complex and also seem destined for extinction. When I am working in a group, I often listen to the "rhythm" around me. I sometimes see managers using intimidation to silence others around them and workers withholding important information because they've learned that knowledge is power. My colleagues will start complaining about how awful an organization is and how impossible it is to get anything done. To me the "rhythm" is my best weapon in understanding how I can add value and bring about lasting change. I view these times as my opportunity to understand the ecosystem and get creative in developing just enough process to help avoid making mistakes.
Engineering the process
As a process engineer it is my job to define the tasks, roles and responsibilities and a set of tests to confirm compliance with the agreed upon process that is implemented to improve efficiency and/or avoid mistakes. Frederick Taylor did this with his time and motion studies in developing his Scientific Management. This work and the many subsequent studies have inspired me throughout my career as a "process guy" working in software engineering. Instead of looking at the efficiency of handling a shovel, I look for ways to avoid mistakes when a release of complex software is about to be deployed that will potentially move millions of dollars around the world. In one of my jobs I got to use these skills to help get the software into production that was used on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. In one incident, the wrong version of a shell script literally stopped the world economy for one hour when the New York Stock Exchange crashed. Our source code management process was so strong that we found the source of the error in five minutes flat (the bug was still online) and prevented another disaster from occurring. We had a good process with excellent forensics. We knew exactly what was supposed to be online and when an SA accidentally overwrote the wrong scripts we were able to quickly respond and resolve the situation. We had a solid and repeatable process in place.
Don't be fooled by the labels...
Whether you are plowing through the SEI's CMMi, ISO 9000-3 or getting your green belt in six sigma, all of these methodologies have a lot of extra steps that are not always practical in the real world. The Agile folks, with their XP evangelists, are no better in that they take a "one size fits all" approach to many of their practices. My view is to develop "just enough process to get the job done and avoid mistakes." I will study all of the process models and, shamelessly steal their best practices, and apply the best of them to each of my unique situations. I will often not recommend that the same practices be used across an entire organization. Some groups have problems and need more structures in areas where others do not. Too much process seems silly to those who have to follow the steps day in and day out and frankly I can't blame them. A good process model addresses issues that are relevant to the organization and seem fair. Over the coming year we will be working to discuss more aspects of overcoming resistance to change and I hope that you will write to me to share your best practices and greatest challenges. It's the beginning of the calendar year and a perfect time to start improving your own software development process.
Where do you begin?
The first step is in identifying your goals and objectives. Solving problems that your company does not really have is frankly a waste of time. Creating consensus and realizing that understanding your own quirky corporate "ecosystem" is absolutely a key part of your job. Listening for the "rhythm" of your organization will provide you with some excellent tools as you define just enough process to help your organization avoid mistakes and become more efficient. Welcome to "just in time process improvement"!
Bob Aiello is a Senior Editor for CM Crossroads and an Associate Director at a major financial services firm in NYC, where he has company wide responsibility for Software Configuration and Release Management best practices. Bob is on the Steering Committee of the NYC Software Process Improvement Network (CitySPIN), where he is also the chair of the CM SIG which meets in Midtown NYC. Mr. Aiello has a Masters in Industrial Psychology from NYU and a BS in Computer Science from Hofstra University.
During the fall of 2006, the new principal began the year in an open and friendly manner. Although I had been promised by Tam that the new principal would be informed of the events that lead to the investigation it did not happen. When I met briefly with her, she told me she had chosen not to be informed. (I found this particularly troubling as Tam had asked me to move forward. I expected him to keep his word and he did not.) At the meeting with the principal I requested additional computer training. She said that it would be provided. I am always ready to begin anew, so the first 4-6weeks went well.
Civil: (adj) Adhearing to the norms of polite society; not deficient in common courtesy.
My academic team was working on a new classroom based assessment (CBA) with minimal time together. Both of my colleagues coached sports after school so our weekly 6th period plan was cut short. When we reached our scheduled start date for library research, no one else was ready to start. Consequently, I started the project without a guide (the finalized rubric) to show the students. I eventually used my own roughed-out rubric to correct the CBA because my class finished before the others. This lead to two unpleasant events.
First, I went to talk to the principal (the vp was present); I tried to explain to her that our team was having difficulties with the CBA for lack of time together; the department chair had failed to complete the rubric. I was trying to request problem solving, but instead was demeaned. She told, me in a nasty tone, to do my own work, that he did his own work and I should take my own notes. It was not up to him to do my work. (I did not bother pointing out that I had offered to complete the rubric for the group and was turned down. Or that both of these coaches were wearing many “hats” and working extremely hard. This was not a matter of finding anyone at fault, it was a matter of scheduling sufficient time together to accomplish what she had requested.) I pointed out that the rubric is supposed to be identical for all students, that historical laws/guidelines are written down so there can be no question as to what is expected. I felt attacked. I left realizing that the beginning of the year had been a sham; that the new principal was behaving in the same bullying manner as the previous one. It is troubling that we teach problem solving and teamwork techniques to our students, yet our administrators do not model and use these skills.
Second, I again requested additional technical training and the principal gave me a terse answer. She told me to contact one of the two tech trainers in the building and do it after school or during planning (which we did not share.) Do it yourself. I did not contact the lead tech person as he left immediately after school because his wife was seriously ill. I let it go. In November or early December there was a staff meeting where the new three-tier technology guide was introduced. The principal introduced it by assuring the staff that nobody was expected to be in the second or third tier this year. She then asked us to take a few minutes to skim the document and mark anything in the first column we had used. After a few minutes she began by praising a new technology practice used by Mike Kendrick. She asked him to explain the project, which he did.
Then she asked for volunteers to tell what technology they had employed. I raised my hand but she called on a new staff teacher who mentioned an item from the first tier. She spoke encouraging words to the woman. She asked for more volunteers, but no one raised their hand, so she called on me. I began with the first column and noted about half of the items. In the second column I noted about 1/3 of the items, and in the third column I pointed out about 1/3 of the items. I was explaining what we did and the tech advisor broke in, “That’s right. You’ve done a lot of that during your National History Day research.”
Actually, while much was done during research, much was also done during other class projects. When I finished she said nothing to me, did not look at me or acknowledge my presence. She turned away from me to a table and picked up some papers saying, “Now for the next item on the agenda . . .” She had a choice to admire and encourage but instead she chose to ignore me, a form of shunning and certainly not a model courtesy for staff or children.
The other troubling incident occurred on a non-student day. To make the training “more fun”, we were going to do an activity. The principal had brought a toy to school. She had placed a target at the front of the room and asked the vp to model how the toy GUN work. He looked extremely uncomfortable. However, after a couple of mishaps he did shoot the dart onto the target. She asked several people to described their goals, then shoot the target. The point was “reaching your goals.” So in a school where we had removed all weapons from the drama department when we put up signs at the entrances about a gun free zone, the principal provides a different model. I found this disturbing.
When I retired and left the school in December of ’06 it was not the school I knew and loved. Although I had gone out of my way to email the principal before school began concerning hall management strategies we had been using, it became obvious that there were few teachers in the halls. I opened my doors in the morning to children who were uncomfortable in that atmosphere. Years of systematically developing rapport with students, applying respectful corrections to discourteous and off-task students, looking to administration for support, guidance and inspiration had disappeared. In place there is a top down, punitive attitude. And hounds pestering, bothering and attacking their hard working colleagues.
Harass 1. to disturb persistently; torment as with troubles or cares; bothercontinually; torment as with troubles or cares; pester, persecute. 2. to trouble by repeated attacks, incursions, etc., as in war or hostilities; harry; raid. MF harasser Equivalent to hare, interjection to urge hunting dogs on.
Editorial: Thank you for sharing.
The golden rule is best interpreted as saying: "Treat others only in ways that you're willing to be treated in the same exact situation." To apply it, you'd imagine yourself in the exact place of the other person on the receiving end of the action. If you act in a given way toward another, and yet are unwilling to be treated that way in the same circumstances, then you violate the rule.
To apply the golden rule adequately, we need knowledge and imagination. We need to know what effect our actions have on the lives of others. And we need to be able to imagine ourselves, vividly and accurately, in the other person's place on the receiving end of the action. With knowledge, imagination, and the golden rule, we can progress far in our moral thinking.
The golden rule is best seen as a consistency principle. It doesn't replace regular moral norms. It isn't an infallible guide on which actions are right or wrong; it doesn't give all the answers. It only prescribes consistency - that we not have our actions (toward another) be out of harmony with our desires (toward a reversed situation action). It tests our moral coherence. If we violate the golden rule, then we're violating the spirit of fairness and concern that lie at the heart of morality.
The golden rule, with roots in a wide range of world cultures, is well suited to be a standard to which different cultures could appeal in resolving conflicts. As the world becomes more and more a single interacting global community, the need for such a common standard is becoming more urgent.
Essentially, as I understand this rule, we should use language and terminology that best suits the situation and people we are describing. If I decided to scam taxpayers, I would fully expect and anticipate opposition from anyone and everyone that might be aware of my scam. I would not expect people to express their displeasure in my conduct with profanity or personal insults. I would anticipate people thinking or concluding that I was evil and unfit for public service. I would expect people to theorize how a corrupt public servant became so terribly corrupt.
It is important to make the distinction that not every evil person is evil all of the time. Sometimes they fall asleep and dream about evil things without actually putting the evil action into effect until the next day. To combat evil whenever and wherever we encounter it, we need to engage in a comprehensive evaluation of the conduct and be deliberate in our assessment. We cannot root out corrupt officials by keeping quiet or accepting things as the status quo. If they commit the crime, they should expect to do some time.
I cannot stress enough that our comments must meet an acceptable threshold. It is entirely understandable that many readers of this blog are irritated and feeling desperate for change in management. We have witnessed corruption for far too long and seek to end its nasty reign as soon as humanly possible. Change will happen but we need not stoop to the level so frequently utilized by district administration.
Please keep your comments clean and constructive. It would also be helpful to be careful when submitting comments as a recent change in the Blogger format has led to some comments being lost in transmission. If you have something lengthy to contribute, please just email it directly to mark@esd15.org and I will do what I can to post it with haste.
Editorial: The golden rule information was found on line at this web address.
That's right. I know everyone was already thinking it, but I had to write it on the blog. District management needs to lose weight. A lot of it. The organization (I use the term very loosely here) has been getting very heavy in the middle and could stand to drop some dead weight - in 200 pound increments.
With his new pair of crutches, a certain facilities director would be the first to go. Professionally hobbling along on public assistance (yes, I said it) and honing his only talent - delegating to each of his shiny new crutches. When his armpits tire, he retreats to his soon-to-be-reconfigured tall box by the window. Those residing in the shadows have my sympathy.
You see, the position of Facilities Operations Director was created because the Executive Director of Business and Operations couldn't manage the Director of Maintenance. There was a lot of dysfunction for a lot of years. When the Director of Planning, Property, Risk, Safety, Custodial and Emergency Services resigned, there was an opportunity to shift this responsibility to someone new. Perhaps a new person with a new title: Director of Planning, Property, Risk, Safety, Custodial, Emergency Services and Maintenance - or just Director of Facilities Operations for short.
Unfortunately for the taxpayer, the Director of Maintenance retired and since this new position had already been created, another cog in middle management became swollen and bloated. Ideally, the District should eliminate the Facilities Operations position and shift the Custodial Manager and Maintenance Manager positions back to the Executive Director of Business and Operations for reporting.
There cannot be any real benefit to having custodial and maintenance issues translated by the Director of Facilities Operations for the comprehension of the Executive Director of Business and Operations, unless something happened during the transition to Assistant Superintendent. How that happened has always been a mystery for the rest of us.
In facilities management, it isn't uncommon to have superintendents and assistant superintendents. These are people that normally look after the management of buildings. But in the academic world, an assistant superintendent should have some sort of academic qualification. An advanced degree perhaps? I wonder how Ellen, Sue, Tony and Ken feel about their new academic counterparts. I used to think it might require a few extra years of schooling to carry so prestigious a title. Apparently, they hand such titles out like candy.
In any case, the taxpayer is footing the bill for such middle managers. Changing titles to justify creeping salaries doesn't have anyone fooled. When companies lack the money to enrich their friends immediately, they frequently use the budget rut to fluff titles and when the money comes back they look around and ask, "How is the Chief Assistant Superintendent of Life and Liberty earning less than $200,000 a year?" Especially when they might spend 30 times that amount on what could be described as a protracted date.
Soil compression is an interesting thing. When you have a piece of property, full of rotting debris and loosely packed materials, you might just want to accumulate a very large pile of dirt to help compact the soil. That is exactly what is going on at the new administration site.
Under that very large pile of dirt is what remains of an active landfill from the 60s and 70s and all of the debris that was shoved into that hole when they built Interstate 5. Sure, to the casual observer it may just look like dirt, but the weight of all that soil will compress the dirt in the vicinity and possibly discourage future subsidence.
The correct (and rather expensive) approach would be to excavate the area and export the debris. But if you did that and hit the inevitable patch of contaminated materials, you would have to pack up your crew and roll out a team of environmental consultants. A flurry of monitoring and significant delays in construction would lead to additional cost to the project - and further evidence of poor decisions by district management.
So the "solution" selected by our public servants is to bury the problem with the power of compressed dirt. It sounds like the same approach they take in dealing with disgruntled staff - bury them under a pile of waste and hope the intense pressure silences them forever.
The server at Perkins Coie happened upon the two stories below. Maybe Perkins didn't know that the board wanted the new administration site and asked Marla to negotiate. It stands to reason that if Perkins told Marla directly, that they didn't believe the District should buy the contaminated site, maybe they are seeking to understand how the District decided to buy it anyway.
I see a legal argument developing here. If Marla was told by consultants, co-workers, appraisers and legal counsel to not buy the site and then the school board told her to move forward with the purchase, what is she supposed to do?
So, the board has to accept full responsibility for buying a contaminated landfill and they have to accept that they sent one of their minions into a negotiation that couldn't end well. But the end game is that district voters are even more convinced of something they already suspected - the board is full of dim-witted imbeciles - and Marla gets to save face and assign responsibility everywhere else.
There you have it. Congratulations.
The only down side is that everyone already knows that most boards are full of uninformed know-nothings and that they rely heavily on the advice and guidance of staff that should know a little something about what they are paid to do. Clearly, Marla must have forgotten to tell the board that everyone was opposed to the purchase.
I take it back. There isn't an argument that protects Marla from the responsibility of sharing the advice of expensive consultants, appraisers and legal counsel.
01:37:13 PM More from the District's legal team.
01:37:13 PM Board wanted site. Marla just negotiated.
01:37:13 PM seassgs-cluster.perkinscoie.com (198.22.100.4)
The District celebrates.
Not to blow our horn, but wouldn't it be a hoot to be nominated for all of the great things that the blog is doing on a daily basis? A newly emerging system of checks and balances. Every great form of government has such a system. Isn't it worth celebrating?
When something stinks - we say so. When board members "modernize" - we point it out. When the superintendent lies to cover a friend's arse - we draw attention to it. When questionable land transactions are pieced together without regard for public funds - we write about it. When administrators are gifted huge raises (Oops, I meant "given") - we cover it.
Just look through the long list of great stories of the past and imagine the board refusing to acknowledge the impact of the blog.
Of course, don't use your own name. You would just be declaring your loyalty to the blog and may be subject to harassment, discrimination and eventual termination.
ESD15.org
9003 Olympic View Drive
Edmonds, Washington 98026
Editorial: Please do not send cash or checks.
I have learned very valuable lessons from reading your blog, but perhaps you might want to do a separate entry called "Things I Learned During This Process." You could include the various lessons that ALL of us at the ESC can learn.
Lessons like:
1. Your email is not your email. Even when you print out an email of praise from a supervisor, that paper is not yours to keep. It is district property and must be returned.
2. You may keep NO personal files, copies of resumes, images, sounds, songs, or ideas on your district computer. Nothing. No screen savers of your kids, no images of your significant other, nothing. If you do, you are misusing district resources. ESD employees are to immediately purge their laptops of anything personal.
3. After your leave the district's employment, you are still subject to their whims. You may not work for other agencies whose interests may conflict with the district, nor can you take any lessons learned or information processed with you when you go. The ESD will determine who you can work for, even after they terminate your employment.
4. All administrators at ESD are evil, with the exception of Ken Limon, who is, I believe, the only administrator NOT mentioned on the blog so far.
5. If your boss' name is Marla or Manny, quit now. It won't end well.
6. If you download porn onto a district computer, watch it during the day. No one will find it.
Editorial: Thank you to this contributor. Without a name I can't forward your residuals when I sell the movie rights. By the way, Ken Limon was apparently involved in further targeting staff that were forced into early retirement and bullied by administrators. He signed the no trespass order against these contributors. He, of course, is welcome to draft a rebuttal and I will be happy to have it ripped apart on the blog.
To all ESC employees:
After a re-evaluation of the plans for the key audit, the scheduled audit for Monday and Tuesday Jan 14th and 15th has been changed. In order to facilitate a more expedient audit, we will not be asking employees to meet in the ESC lobby. Instead, please be prepared to present your keys, as we come to each of you beginning Monday January 14th and through the week, in order to update our records. This will better provide the time necessary for each employee. In addition, we have had several employees bring in many old keys, and we want to encourage everyone to do this- let’s make a fresh start for the New Year!
Thank you for you flexibility and cooperation.
I have a question. What would happen if I somehow found a complete set of records of all ESC staff and the keys they possess? Would the District accuse me of stealing these records? Would the District claim that these records belong to the District and I had no right to retain them? What if I said that I actually never possessed them but buried them on a publicly accessible server in case hard drives were struck by lightning. You know, in case Marla walked by my former desk and God tried to strike her down with a bolt from above.
Of course, the District should have found a complete database of such records when they poured through my former hard drive. Everything is there already. All a person would have to do is print up the list and then verify that the keys are still with the same people. In fact, as I mentioned before, there is a hard copy in the vault. It's the room that seems to be left unlocked and open from time to time.
Just trying to be helpful.
Many of you have been writing in to the blog expressing concern about the lack of entries from January 1 until January 10, 2008. In fact, some of you went so far as to suggest the District shut us down. Just how that would happen, I cannot imagine. Have you been reading the blog? Can you imagine a scenario that involves the District's legal team pulling the plug on our public forum? This blog is an instrument for change and though the District may be opposed to change, they cannot stop a force for good.
The short hiatus was due to a small disagreement with my writing staff. They caught wind of all of the money that can be made in residual payments when this blog is eventually launched into syndication. They wanted a piece of the action and demanded to have their issues addressed under threat of a strike. I tried to convince them that the blog is not driven by money and that I would never relinquish control to corporate fat cats seeking to control the movie rights. My writers didn't believe me and staged a short walk out.
Fortunately, I know my writers. I know they love the smell of Krispy Kreme doughnuts in the morning and cannot resist the call of freshly-brewed All City Coffee. It was only a matter of time before they had to get back to writing.
Sorry for the lapse in coverage and thank you for your continued support and words of encouragement.
Mark Zandberg
Executive Director of Blog Content Development
Editorial: Seriously, because I cannot lie to you, I was caught up in a few investigations and strategic planning that took up a lot of my time. There was also a couple of days of the sniffles and I didn't want to drip on my keyboard.
[Wendy]
I received this from opposing counsel last week. Let me know if you want to discuss.
[Mark]
Though the District doesn't know what documents I have, this one I kept because it was a friendly letter from Marla, which is a very rare thing to obtain. I put it in my references file, along with a few other friendly letters that you have in my file there.
I am not a public agency and not obligated to reveal or provide documents that were sent to me. Do they want my pay stubs? Holiday cards sent from others? Just what limits would be placed on this request.
They have all of my email stored on their servers. They are welcome to dig through them and use what they like.
[Wendy]
Opposing counsel emailed me to follow up on the District's request for return of docs. I told counsel to be more specific about what the District thought you possessed and what it wanted back. I told them, though, that I'd ask you to return the one specific letter referenced in its request (the friendly letter from Marla). Would you mind mailing to me, and I will forward to oppo counsel.
Here is that email message.
I have received email and calls to the tip line about how Marla felt she was qualified to run the operations side of the District, because her brothers were in construction. My eyebrows still pop upward when I hear or read such a justification for her position.
Having reviewed her resume, I am a little bewildered as to why she didn't include her brother's professions among her qualifications. It certainly wouldn't have hurt her chances of getting hired at the District. By now we all know it isn't a matter of what you know, but who you know. Or, apparently what your brother's might know.
I am wondering if these brothers in construction had more influence over current district management than I may have originally surmised. Perhaps little Marla had to evolve into a cunning, manipulative scheme artist to survive in her household. Maybe it is through a honed set of skills in deception that led to a life of duping the public for personal enrichment. Maybe there is a deeper problem here that would require the involvement of mental health practitioners.
With all due respect, the recent piano scam has revealed a number of things;
1. It is possible for a con artist to lose track of their scheme. While it is clear that Marla sought to enrich someone with whom she had developed a personal relationship, she back-peddled when things started to feel uncomfortable. By throwing $39,000.00 at her new friend, she had hoped to avoid the consequences of poor choices.
2. While I originally thought that Arnie Tucker was just looking for a one time gift of public funds and befriended Marla in an effort to secure a hand out, I have since backed away from that concept. I think Arnie was interested in the long game. I think he was interested in dining at the District's expense for years and years. I suspect that Arnie was looking to have these lease schemes rolled out every year.
3. Manny's involvement seems like every bit of the character people have been claiming that he is. When an unsavory aroma wafts from Marla's direction, Manny stands at the ready to fan the fumes and make excuses. He is loyal and knows who butters his bread. Clearly a patsy. A fall guy.
4. Tam was a bit of a surprise. I am quite convinced that he was swimming with sharks and probably got in over his head. No doubt there was an opportunity to provide pianos to school kids and I suspect Tam was interested in the outcome. He was probably fixated on the outcome and deferred any qualms about process to Marla. After all, if the head of business and operations claims there is nothing immoral about the piano scam, why would a music man step in the way?
5. The board remains every bit of the cast of clowns they have always been. Far more impressed with the seats they sit in than any sense of obligation to perform their assigned tasks to the best of their abilities. I remain convinced that each of these "bored" members have out-lived their recommended shelf life and they need to step aside and make room for people who hold public servants accountable. We need people on the board that are not afraid to speak up or ask real questions. At this stage, it would be far better to have a board of crazed lunatics than five useless do-nothings. Perhaps people might start showing up at meetings to watch the excitement.
6. The superintendent, like his five puppet masters, doesn't understand the financial impact of rushing forward with bad ideas. He continues to cook up new and interesting ways to present himself to the public while our district is consumed with fire from his kitchen. Sure, we can talk about how students can improve their academic performance by throwing a few dollars at new programs, but wouldn't it be more prudent to prevent the millions and millions of dollars from being handed out to Marla's friends?
Still disgusted.
Editorial: Is it a violation of attorney client privilege if I reveal that Brian Harding thinks Jerry Lutz of Perkins Coie is an as#hole?
Some months ago, an avid reader commented that he would consider the blog a success if it ever posted it's 100th entry. Not that we are overly-fixated on so arbitrary a benchmark, but we have now posted our 200th entry and continue to look forward to the next many years of constructively engaging the District in its many, many questionable decisions and misinterpretation of board policies. While it is sad to see these short-sighted and self-serving people in public education, it remains our hope that they may one day seek to be more responsible. Preferably somewhere else.
There are still a number of allegations floating around from the District's legal team and they need to be flushed. (The allegations, not the team. I have actually started to enjoy my exchanges with Duncan. Thank you.)
Second, while an employee of the District, Mr. Zandberg and his supervisor met with a Jaswinder Singh who was interested in buying property adjacent to Brier Terrace Middle School. Working with Perkins Coie, Mr. Zandberg and his supervisor informed Mr. Singh that the District would not grant his request for an easement to access his property using the driveway of Brier Terrace Middle School. After he resigned, Mr. Zandberg then took on Mr. Singh as his "client" using information he had gained as an employee to represent Mr. Singh's adverse interests.
I would think this matter would also fall well within whistleblower protection, if one sought to include it as such. In this case, the District possesses a document that grants perpetual access for one, single family residence. Mr. Singh acknowledges the existence of this document and may or may not have seen this document first hand. The reason why Mr. Singh met with me and my supervisor was to negotiate the possibility of obtaining a second access point when and if Mr. Singh sought to subdivide. The District was dismissive in granting such access and I support my former supervisor in taking this position. The District currently seeks to exclude Mr. Singh from accessing his primary residence, despite a letter from the District granting such permission. This is the same letter that both Marla Miller and Brian Harding told me to "bury".
With respect to Mr. Zandberg's use of King County computer resources to send e-mails to District employees, the District has, at various times, received e-mails from Mark Zandberg, Kirsten and Rachel Brisbane, which have been traced through the District's IT Department as originating from the same IP address, and having been routed through the King County computer server.
I find your faith in the District's IT Department to be laughable and without a morsel of credibility. The fact that individuals may have emailed me at an address that I access from work, once in a while, and that their concerns may have been forwarded to District employees for comment or informative purposes, does not even come close to a level suggesting anything other than normal conduct. Again, as I have said before, the District's legal team would be better advised to counsel their client on the appropriate use of public funds.
With respect to Mr. Zandberg's use of District e-mail under a false name, Gary Noble received an e-mail allegedly from Debbie Jakala on September 27, 2007 at 9:40 p.m. That message encouraged Mr. Noble to visit a posting on Mark Zandberg's blog, containing malicious statements about Mr. Noble's wife. Ms. Jakala did not send that e-mail, and it has been traced to an IP address outside of the District. Likewise, Clint Goodison allegedly received an e-mail from himself, inviting him to visit a posting on Mark Zandberg's blog, containing disparaging remarks about the District's administrator's salaries. Mr. Goodison did not send that e-mail, and it has also been traced to an IP address outside of the District.
I suspect you intend to suggest that the name "Debbie Jakala" is not false but the pretense under which it was used may be false. I am flattered that the District thinks such an email came from me, but then since the District's crack IT Department only narrowed it down to somewhere outside of the District, how could you possibly conclude it was sent by me? To clarify, are you suggesting the email came from outside of the geographic boundaries of the District or outside of their server parameters? This would narrow your search from 6.8 billion persons to something closer to one million.
With respect to Mr. Zandberg's contact with a District consultant after he had resigned, on or about September 26, 2007, Mr. Zandberg contacted District consultants Al Morgan, at Reid Middleton, and Deb Ladd at AMEC, asking about a meeting that had occurred on May 10, 2005, and particularly inquiring about which District board members had attended the meeting. In response, Deb Ladd forwarded a page from a proposal she had prepared documenting that meeting. Mr. Zandberg responded by asking her questions she felt were inappropriate, and she attempted to contact him by telephone at the District, whereupon she learned that he was no longer a District employee. Ms. Ladd then informed the District of his inquiries and stated that because Mr. Zandberg had been using the esd15.org e-mail address, she thought he still worked for the District. She has prepared a declaration citing these facts.
Wow, Duncan, thank you for authenticating my earlier statements about the mysterious meeting that Marla claimed resulted in her being directed to start negotiating for the contaminated swamp - if you can call that a negotiation. Marla has been claiming that a lot more happened at that meeting than actually did and I am honored that you have taken the time to verify that I did get my information from a very reliable source. It is a shame, however, that people are so easily confused by the use of a dot org domain. The District is still in education, right?
On a grammatical note, your sentences are rather long-winded and your inclination toward commas is a test of tolerance. I don't need to take so many breaths of air when I am reading to myself.
Finally, with respect to the destruction of public records, at the time the District denied Mr. Zandberg's claim, the District was relying on a forensic computer analysis suggesting that files had been intentionally wiped from Mr. Zandberg's former hard drive using wiping software, or that files had been encrypted prior to deleting them. However, upon further investigation by the District, no evidence of such action has been uncovered.
Remember what I said about your faith in the District's IT Department? They have left me laughing on more than several occasions.
The matter of the anonymous letter has been resolved. As indicated in a previous entry, I mailed seven postcards from around the Seattle area and kept track of their starting positions and the postmarks that were stamped upon them.
When the postcards arrived, I carried them to a man that retired from 34 years in the postal service. After a brief evaluation of the postmarks, it was determined beyond a reasonable doubt that the source is within one block of Seattle's Department of Transportation.
The odds of Pat Shields, Gary Noble or any other "anonymous" member of the public mailing the letter from within a block of Susan Paine's place of employment is highly improbable.
We need more intelligent board members.
Don't be alarmed, but I run server inquiries on a regular basis to check who might be reading the blog and what pages they read. This is done in part to determine what story lines are of interest to the District and their legal counsel.
For instance, an IP address normally used by jlutz at Perkins Coie read an article at 8:47 AM that covered attorney client information. I find it humorous that Perkins discouraged the purchase of the new administration site and yet when Marla bought it anyway, I am being accused of having revealed protected information.
I find it a little bewildering that someone from Nick Brossoit's alma mater would be interested in reading the blog. Unless it was Nick himself and he was either at PLU when he read the blog, or has internet access through some sort of relationship there.
I also find it rather peculiar that when a Professional-Technical employee has a real estate license and works in the industry, legal claims there is some sort of conflict and yet the superintendent teaches at Seattle University. Of course, Manuel Juzon also teaches. Is that one of those board policies that is entirely open to interpretation and applied whenever it suits management or their legal counsel?
Time (EST) IP Address
12:37:19 PM plu.edu (152.117.104.146)
Several Deleted
11:47:15 AM seassgs-cluster.perkinscoie.com (198.22.100.4)
Editorial: For those of you who might be worried that your comments may be tracked back to you through IP address mining, don't worry. The data is protected and the domain is entirely outside of any District influence. All server information is periodically cleansed to protect your identities.
It takes a big man to admit when he is wrong. I was wrong. I thought Arnie Tucker was taking a bunch of dim-witted District managers for a ride when all along, it was the District playing the man like a fiddle. Oops, I mean piano.
Read Exhibit 1, where Manny Juzon tries to take back money that was paid to Arnie Tucker in support of this questionable lease that was clearly intended to avoid competitive bidding practices. It is no coincidence that the dollar figure is just a few dimes less than the mandatory required threshold of $40,000 for competitive bidding procedures - and this guy teaches management for some online diploma mill in Missouri.
Then read the response from Arnie Tucker's lawyer. Notice the fact that his lawyer questions whether legal advice was sought in constructing this "lease agreement" and also his interesting use of the term "scheme". It is very clear that Marla and Manny hoped to avoid competitive bidding requirements and were fully expecting to exploit a small company just trying to make a buck. I am not so sure I like District managers financially screwing businesses on behalf of the taxpayer. The rules are intended to protect everyone.
Then you have to take a look at the actual invoice that Marla and Manny claim is false. It isn't "false" but it does show the effort they exerted to keep the dollar amount just under $40,000.00.
There is nothing honorable about this transaction. In fact, there is nothing honorable about the conduct of District managers putting this deal together and going out of their way to avoid legally-required processes.
There is an absolute failure of leadership at every level. The board didn't know what they were looking for when they hired Nick Brossoit and he has absolutely no understanding of the operations side of the house. This gives seasoned schemers every opportunity to hatch questionable transactions for the benefit of themselves and their cronies.
I am disgusted.
1. With respect to Mr. Zandberg's use of District computers to conduct personal business, the District has recovered electronic files and/or documents from the District computer assigned to him while he was employed by the District, many of which are personal in nature, and not related to District business.
(Big deal)
Several of these electronic files reflect employment searches by Mr. Zandberg, which were conducted on District time (Note to Management: when constructively terminating staff, you should expect they might start looking for work somewhere else. Having cover letters or resumes on one's hard drive does not mean they were developed on company time.), and several files appear to contain images (There are only three image files associated with my online resume. You must mean my online photo album. I hope you enjoyed the photos.) used to create the website www.markzandberg.com, on which Mr. Zandberg maintains his resume.
Mr. Zandberg notes on that resume that he has worked as a realtor for RE/MAX since 2005, at the same time as he was employed by the District (I was never told I could not have a second job and I never signed away my right to have such a second job.), and electronic files related to RE/MAX were found on Mr. Zandberg's hard drive as well.
Are you really so stupid as to make this an issue? I performed dozens and dozens of property searches with my access to real estate sites that I used for the benefit of the District. In fact, the District encouraged me to obtain my real estate license and even paid for the exam. They had full knowledge of my real estate license and took full advantage of the access it provided. Care to pick up three years of desk fees and dues?
The District also discovered files containing images of what appears to be various pages from Edmonds rental property (I do not have any rental properties in Edmonds.) and African safari websites referencing the name "Umsizi", which is an African name bestowed on Mr. Zandberg according to his resume.
Duncan, you have my utmost sympathy. The scant material you have to pull together to make a case against me is rather slim and insignificant. The District would be out of their mind to make a case to terminate me on this sort of evidence. Were you aware that there are teachers that tutor for additional income? Custodians that clean for extra income? Managers that sell public property for kickbacks and personal favors?
2. With respect to Mr. Zandberg's use of confidential or proprietary information, you will recall that in its denial letter the District simply stated that it was investigating whether Mr. Zandberg had been using proprietary and confidential information to benefit his personal business.
I define "business" as making a profit for performing some sort of task. I have never made any money peddling District information, access or property, unlike District management.
First, Mr. Zandberg himself raised a red (I prefer blue) flag as to that issue as he has already divulged attorney-client privileged information on his blog, which he apparently learned in meetings he attended with the District's counsel from Perkins Coie.
I never signed any sort of agreement that required me to withhold the truth or lie to the public to support District management's efforts to defraud taxpayers. When I left the meeting with Perkins Coie, everyone agreed that the property transaction was dead and that we would not be moving forward. Marla elected to move the transaction forward on her own. Exposing such is not privileged information. Marla acted contrary to the advice of AMEC, Reid Middleton and Perkins Coie.
He divulges this information in an attempt to discredit Assistant Superintendent Marla Miller with respect to a recent property transaction. (Marla discredits herself.) See "Rise above the confusion of conflicting rumors," dated September 19, 2007. Mr. Zandberg again repeated that privileged information on September 25, 2007.
Editorial: This is the first of two parts. I will include the rest of the District's letter when more time allows. Here it is.
While I worked in Edmonds I was threatened with a poor evaluation and approached in a threatening manner by an angry, intense, red-faced administrator. I had come in to get clarification on a technical question. When I tried to back out of the meeting, the person demanded that I settle this now, and began punching the air saying, “We'll do this now. Right now.” I was so terrified and upset that I began to cry and quietly asked if there was something I could eat. I was feeling faint. They found food, I ate a couple of crackers and left. I was so upset that I avoided contact for months afterward.
(see RCW 94.04 J)
A couple of months later there was an incident where I became upset and had words with a person new to the building. I knew I was wrong after I spoke, but before I could talk to them classes began. She was upset and went to the administrator, who called me to the office. Before meeting with the administrator I spoke with the person I hurt, apologizing and explaining why I was upset. She totally understood and forgave me. The administrator lead us into the office where they repeated the earlier performance in front of the staff member. Out of the corner of my eye I could see her eyes get huge. “We’re going to talk about this right now.” I asked for an EEA rep. “No, we’re going to talk about this now,” in an intense and angry manner. I stood my ground and repeated my request; he left and returned with a Rep. We never talked about what originally took place. The rep asked me later what had happened and I explained. Having known seven previous administrators, I had never run into this kind of abusive and threatening behavior. Eventually, I talked to three other people in the building who the administrator had also yelled at.
As the year went on, I avoided the office and the specific administrator. At the beginning of the following year I intentionally talked with the administrator asking “What can I do to make things better.” I received no answer.
That year I used an activity from What Every Middle School Teacher Should Know. (T. Knowles and D. F. Brown) Over several days students reflected on concerns: personal and family, community, state and national, world. We shared out and created a list of important issues. The students were brutally open and honest. At the word “harassment” no one wanted to share so I said, “I’ll tell you about a situation I faced.” Before I could continue, a boy yelled out, “Is Mr. X bullying you, too?” I quickly recovered and described intimidation by a boss in earlier years. Students notice these things.
My question is, “How can teachers themselves protect students from bullying when subjected to intimidation and threats from people in authority? Who can you turn to?"
At one point we requested assistance from the union. We were told there was going to be a meeting with administration, but at the last minute the union rep reported that the administration was too busy (Later the union claimed that the employee caused the meeting to be cancelled by not making a formal complaint [which we considered professional suicide]). A letter was written to upper administration describing the treatment given certain staff in the building; the administration responded by asking the problem principal if the allegations were true. Of course, they were denied and the upper administration closed ranks. The school year ended on that sour note.
(see RCW 94.04 H)
What can you do when complaints and concerns are not investigated by those in positions of power when required?
"Delta"
Editorial: This is a guest submittal and likely the first of many parts to run in the next days and weeks. Thank you to the author for sharing your experience with the rest of us.
One by one, jurors who convicted a Seattle man of first-degree murder a month ago were ushered into a courtroom on Wednesday.
It was a rare post-trial questioning of panel members over whether any of them improperly conducted Internet research about the case. Afterward, Snohomish County Superior Court Judge Thomas Wynne said there was no hint of impropriety, and that Noel Caldellis' conviction should stand. "I don't see any evidence of misconduct," Wynne said. "It appears the jurors followed the instructions of the court." The questioning was the latest trial-level bid by Seattle defense lawyer Raymond McFarland to overturn the conviction of Caldellis, 20. He was convicted of gunning down a college student from Mukilteo on Sept. 3, 2006. The next stop for McFarland will be at the state Court of Appeals, where he vowed to challenge rulings that Wynne made during the trial.
Meanwhile, Caldellis is behind bars, awaiting a Feb. 13 sentencing. He faces a prison term between 34 and 42 years. In his 29 years as a judge, it's the first time Wynne has called a jury back to question them about possible impropriety without first being provided some evidence of jury misconduct, he said. Of concern here was an Internet blog posted by an uncle of victim Jay Clements, 21. The blog included comments on the case and some news stories. McFarland became aware of the blog after the trial concluded Dec. 11. The blog started in September 2006 and was removed after the trial.
McFarland was concerned about a posting by someone who said she was a juror -- a day or two after the trial concluded. Jurors are sworn to uphold the law and to follow the judge's instructions. Among other things, they are not allowed to conduct independent research on the case they are hearing, or to read newspaper coverage of trials. McFarland told the judge that if a juror posted a message so soon after the five-week trial, it raised the question whether somebody on the panel had seen the blog earlier. Wynne agreed to question the jurors to address McFarland's concern. Deputy prosecutor Matt Hunter called the defense inquiry "a fishing expedition."
Individually, the seven women and five men who comprised the jury came into Wynne's courtroom Wednesday. Two said they weren't aware of the blog. The rest said they learned about it after the trial and after the judge released them from their obligations as jurors. Some said they did Internet research afterward. None said he or she had any indications the other jurors knew about the blog during the trial. Earlier on Wednesday, Wynne denied three motions brought by Caldellis' lawyer, seeking a new trial. The defense argued the judge and the prosecutor made mistakes.
Clements was killed during a Labor Day weekend party when Caldellis and some of his friends went to Brier for a fight. The jury ruled that Caldellis exercised "extreme indifference to human life" when he fired a .357-caliber pistol into a crowd gathered to watch the melee. Clements was shot twice. Caldellis also was convicted of two counts of second-degree assault.
Editorial: At esd15.org, we are not meddling with murder cases. This blog is only about exposing the profoundly stupid decisions made on behalf of taxpayers by poorly-educated managers without an deliberative board demanding reasonable explanations. The article above is taken from the Herald.
To All ESC Employees,
With the start of a New Year comes the opportunity to clean out those old key chains! We will be conducting a KEY AUDIT of all employees in the ESC building on MONDAY JANUARY 14 from 8:30 to 10:30 a.m. and TUESDAY JANUARY 15 from 8:30 to 10:30 a.m.
We will be in the MAIN FOYER OF THE ESC and will need a response from every employee in order to facilitate an accurate audit. Please be prepared to bring any and all Edmonds School District keys that you have including keys to the main doors, departments, and file cabinets. This process of updating our records will help to improve the overall security of our facility here at the ESC.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
I am wondering where former employees might go to turn in their keys? Will there be an amnesty or reward program? If great grand masters are sold to students (the ones that have been expelled for not following board policy), we could fetch as much as $200. Will the District provide an incentive? Maybe exchange sets of great grand master keys for that highly-prized South Snohomish County Chamber of Commerce membership coupon for District employees.
Call me a cynic but I am guessing the FileMaker Pro database is still missing. Every person in the ESC had their key numbers tracked. I guess management now knows how inefficient it is to delete a user account - even if you detest the user.
Also unfortunate is the fact that everyone in the building has to have their day interrupted just so they can help management re-invent a 6 year old database. What would happen if I told you that a copy of that database is in the ESC? There's a hard copy in the vault, but then that is likely the only thing you have to go on.
Don't you have developer responses to do?
The person that I will be discussing in this entry will not have his name revealed. He has a very long list of legal cases and I would prefer not to be part of his latest attempt to make a dime or dollar. He is a lawyer, lives in the area and makes a living suing anyone at any time for any purpose whatsoever.
The incident occurred on June 3, 2007. It was a Sunday. The supplemental police report reads as follows:
[Kamka]
I was dispatched to a suspicious person on the field at [Former Woodway High School]. The caller, a school employee, had tried to talk to the male to ask him what he was doing. The male responded by yelling at [employee] saying something about working on the field.
Sgt Marsh arrived first and contacted the male, later identified as [Subject]. When I arrived I saw Sgt Marsh approaching [Subject] on foot. [Subject] looked over at Sgt Marsh a few times, but was clearly making no effort to stop working or acknowledge that Sgt Marsh was there.
When I arrived, Sgt Marsh had been talking to [Subject] for a minute or so. I heard [Subject] telling Sgt Marsh that 'they' were going to sue the school because two kids had hurt their knees playing on the field. [Subject] said he was there to fix the field. As Sgt Marsh continued to talk to [Subject], [Subject] was stamping the area around home plate with his foot and not making an effort to actually have a conversation with Sgt Marsh.
Then Sgt Marsh asked [Subject] about his conversation with the custodian. [Subject] instantly became defensive saying he only told her that he had permission to be there. When Sgt Marsh asked if he yelled at her, [Subject] stiffened and said absolutely not.
He then picked up a stamping tool. The tool had an 8" x 8" square iron foot, which was connected to about a 4' wooden pole. He was vigorously stamping the ground with this potentially dangerous tool, completely ignoring Sgt Marsh.
Sgt Marsh told him a few times to stop, but he continued. Sgt Marsh then reached over (they were about an arms length from each other) and took the tool from [Subject] and tossed it to the side, telling [Subject] to stop and to listen to him.
[Subject] became even more upset than he had been, yelling at Sgt Marsh to get his hands off him. As far as I could tell, Sgt Marsh hadn't touched him while taking the tool.
Sgt Marsh leaned in towards [Subject], who is taller, and told [Subject] to stop and listen to him. Sgt Marsh was pointing his finger towards [Subject]'s face, but his finger was at least 6" from it, trying to get [Subject]'s attention. [Subject] then just yelled at Sgt Marsh about being in his face.
Sgt Marsh was still continuing to tell [Subject] that he was there to talk to him about why he was on the field. [Subject] just kept yelling that he had the right to be there, that Sgt Marsh needed to leave him alone, keep his hands off him, and get his finger out of his face.
I believe Sgt Marsh next told [Subject] to leave the field, but he refused. He was told several times, but [Subject] only continued to yell. Sgt Marsh then told [Subject] that he was under arrest for disorderly conduct (against the school employee). Sgt Marsh then told him to turn around and put his hands behind his back, but he refused. He kept yelling that he wasn't doing anything wrong. Sgt Marsh told him over and over to turn around. Finally Sgt Marsh put his hands on [Subject] to make him turn around. [Subject] kept spinning around, telling Sgt Marsh to get his hands off him and that he had no right to touch him. [Subject] turned around several times before the handcuffs were put on. Because we were out on a field, there was nowhere else to corner him except against the chain link backdrop.
[Subject] was still yelling that he was an attorney, that we were making a big mistake, and that he was going to sue us. We told him to just listen and stop arguing. Sgt Marsh told him to walk towards our cars. he continued to argue, and refused to walk unless the handcuffs were loosened. [Subject] was now trying to spin around away from Sgt Marsh.
When we got to the cars, [Subject] was searched incident to the arrest with nothing found in his pockets. He was saying that he's not a criminal and that we were making a big mistake. When Sgt Marsh tried to help him sit in the car [Subject] shrugged him off saying he would do it by himself. I rolled down the windows and walked away from the car to talk to Sgt Marsh.
Sgt Marsh said [Subject] had been argumentative and hostile from the time he arrived. [Subject] had originally been closer to where our vehicles were parked and when he arrived [Subject] intentionally walked away from him.
The custodian spoke with Sgt Marsh for a few minutes while I tried to talk to [Subject] and get his name and date of birth. When I walked up to the car I let [Subject] talk for a few minutes. he was still saying that he was an attorney and we were making a big mistake. When I asked him for his name he said he wasn't going to give it to me. I started to walk away and he said, "Okay, I'll tell you." Instead he said he has a lot of friends who are cops and he knows this isn't right. He complained about what had happened some more. I asked him again what his name was, and again he said he wasn't going to tell me. I said ok and walked away. He called out that this time he would tell me, but I did not return again.
[Marsh]
At 1310 I had a message that [subject] wanted to talk to the duty sergeant. I called him back and when he found out it was me he said that I had broken his wrist or a rib. I couldn't really tell due to the static in the phone call. I stated "oh really?" He said that he was driving to the doctor right now and he would be calling the Chief on Monday. I said okay and hung up. Ofc Kamka later informed me that he had continued to pick up his tools and load things into the truck for several minutes after our contact and I had left.
Charges: Obstructing a Public Servant and Resisting Arrest.
Editorial: The subject also made a call to Marla to get the criminal trespass notice removed and to have all charges dropped. District staff would have had to alter their statements for this friend of Marla's to avoid prosecution.
[Anonymous]
I was at Arnie's yesterday and overheard a man in the booth next to mine ranting about the Edmonds Police and the Edmonds School District . Your name was mentioned many times, rather impolitely. The man's name was [Subject] and he said the school district was managed by pushovers.
Just thought you should know.
[Marla]
Thanks for sharing. It just goes to show no good deed goes unpunished! The man in question was given a second chance for the benefit of his son, not due to his powers of persuasion. However, it is just one more chance . . .
[Mark]
I never received any password and sat quietly at my desk without internet access or the ability to check email, my calendar or voicemail. Today was a day as a volunteer. My last day of effective employment was Thursday, June 7, 2007 - and even that was only the morning hours.
Brian claimed that he never received a password from you. No need to worry. I just wish I could have done more during my final day of service for the District.
[Donovan]
I feared that it had turned into something other than an amicable separation, but I did what I said I was going to do.
Would you work with me to turn over the Esd15.org website? I'm sure it's on their minds and it probably doesn't occur to them that we can simply change the ownership of it if we ask.
[Mark]
You can tell Marla that if she seeks to modify the site, I would be happy to provide a proposal. Since being terminated, I have a lot more time on my hands and would be able to provide a high quality site for a public servant sort of fee.
[Donovan]
They haven’t asked me about it yet. I just wanted to take care of it before it became a large issue if that was possible. If you want to make it an issue that’s up to you, it’s against my advice, but you have to do what you have to do.
If you want to offer Marla your services then you will need to do that directly. All I can do is offer to facilitate to move the domain so that it ceases to be a possible point of contention for you.
If they ask me about the domain I will simply say that I’ve made the suggestion and that you have said no. The rest is up to you.
[Marla]
I wanted to let you know I have authorized Brian to change your voicemail and e-mail greetings to a "who to contact" message.
Also, when you asked me about the esd15.org website, I responded based on my expectation you would leave the site available for people to use for property contacts with the district based on our ads/billboards. I did not expect you to continue to monitor the site or be responsible for responding to requests for information. It seems inappropriate to me that you would use the site to invite people to contact you directly, since the site is clearly meant for communicating with Edmonds School District regarding property inquiries.
Would you please provide me with the information necessary to update the site and make changes to it from here on out?
[Mark]
The site directs all inquiries regarding property to you at your district telephone number. If people seek to contact me personally, they may do so by using the address posted.
The Edmonds School District did not pay for the domain. All work on the domain was performed on my own time and on my own computer. The site is hosted by Iyavaya, not the Edmonds School District. The websites created for Property Management are located at:
www.edmonds.wednet.edu/propertymgt
By the way, the sites will need to be updated to reflect my absence.
Thank you.
[Marla]
Thanks for the clarification, Mark. Are you saying you intend to keep using the esd15.org address as a way of contacting you personally? I don't understand why you would want to do that.
[Mark]
I have several email addresses. If Edmonds School District staff seek to contact me, they may do so by using mark@esd15.org. As a courtesy, I will check the account from time-to-time and offer responses when needed. This email address is so much easier to remember than many of my other addresses.
An email address differs from a website. The website can contain anything under the sun. It could become an operations site, an unofficial district blog, a conduit for property ground leasing information, or whatever. If you seek to customize the look and feel of the website, I would be happy to develop a proposal.
I am a public servant. The domain has always been available for District use as an extension of my professional attributes while employed. Sort of like having a freakishly tall co-worker than can retrieve items from the highest shelf. He may not have been hired for his height, but it comes in handy every now and then.
Mark to Brian on June 6 at 4:17 PM
To ensure that we meet for a length of time that meets your needs and expectations, please book an appointment via Outlook.
Thank you.
Brian to Mark on June 7 at 9:56 AM
It appears that you have not given me the ability to look at your calendar. I had asked you to be available here, today, after 1:00. I need to modify the time so that our meeting can begin at 1:30. The purpose of this meeting is to orient others with your files and outstanding projects needing completion. You have not given me any indication that you would not be available, and stated your intent to cooperate in providing transition information. In addition, you will need to be available, in person, here in the office tomorrow, Friday during the hours between 8 AM and 4:30 PM; (excepting breaks) so that Bob and I can continue, as our schedules permit, to obtain information from you to carry on business.
Mark to Brian on June 7 at 10:27 AM
After reviewing the matter with others, the following points render the meeting irrelevant.
“Any communication prepared on behalf of the District must be reviewed by my supervisor”.
Since everything I do while working for the District is on behalf of the District and involves communicating, the Letter of Direction would have required that I seek your review of any attempt to communicate. Therefore, I have no pending official task items that fall outside of the Letter of Direction. If I actually communicated in an effort to support the District, and did not seek your review, I would be in violation of the Letter of Direction and subject to possible termination (effective versus constructive) or other disciplinary action.
A rhetorical question: Why would the District’s Custodial Manager be assigned work related to Planning and Property Management?
I would be happy to meet to point at file cabinets and share where documents may be found. Just schedule an appointment via Outlook.
Brian to Mark on June 7 at 10:33 AM
You are to be available, in your office, personally during the times mentioned in my e-mail.
Brian to Brian on June 7 at 2:18 PM
ttttttttt
(Brian had my email access terminated and was testing the account to ensure that email traffic was being diverted to him.)
Mark to Brian on June 7 at 4:44 PM
I see that access to my email account has been terminated. Since my last effective day was slated for Monday, does this mean I need not show up for any meetings tomorrow? I have no way of seeing what meetings have been proposed on Outlook without access to my email account. This action only strengthens any claim of constructive termination.
Returning keys to the head custodian does not constitute resignation or demonstrate one's intention to never enter the ESC for work. As I have no need for security access in the final days of employment, I would rather not carry them around or assume the liability of doing so.
I will assume that my services are no longer needed. If incorrect, you may reply to this email address since my District address is no longer accessible.
Mark to Brian on June 7 at 7:46 PM
I recall that you mentioned something about meeting on Friday in an email sent to zandbergm@edmonds.wednet.edu. In checking my email account, it appears as though the account has been terminated. I have no way of knowing when we were to meet if I cannot access my calendar or email.
I would characterize an email account as being critical to the completion of my assigned tasks. Terminating the account would undermine my ability to perform my job.
As you know, I was scheduled to be at work until the 11th of June. You apparently have decided to change my date of termination. I will need a letter confirming my actual last day so I might accurately complete an HR-100 for time off from service to the District.
Mark to Debby on June 8 at 6:18 AM
It would appear that my last day of service was June 7th, 2007. I worked from 9:00 am until 10:30 am, when I transported my wife to CDI for a medical appointment in Mountlake Terrace. You may call to confirm.
I planned to return immediately after her appointment but my calendar, email and voicemail access was terminated.
If you would be so kind as to send my final check to my home address, along with a summary as to what the amount includes and what it does not include, I would appreciate it.
Thank you.
Brian to Mark on June 8, 2007 8:06 AM
In as much as you responded to my e-mail directing you to meet yesterday afternoon and this morning at 8 AM, I find it difficult to believe that you can plead any kind of ignorance to the instructions. Your services are still required here and as your supervisor, I have every right to expect your cooperation.
Your e-mail was suspended after our Head Custodian informed me that you turned in your keys to him saying that you would not be coming back. I find that his statement credible given that I was present in the building when you chose to leave without contacting me, you did not show up for the 1:30 PM meeting, your failure to meet between 9 AM and 10 AM daily this week to assist us with orientation to your office and pending projects, and your failure to be here this morning. Your employment has not been terminated in any way by the District and until this is sorted out, I expect you to perform your duties as an employee.
Mark to Brian on June 8 at 8:50 AM
I was asking for you to propose a meeting through Outlook. Technology can help you understand how meetings are proposed in Outlook. Email does not always provide assurances that conflicts will be resolved in scheduling because one has to see availability prior to booking time. Scheduling or proposing an appointment is very simple. Of course, since my email account has been terminated, there is no way to schedule an appointment now. I am unaware of what other appointments have been deleted.
Gary is very correct in reporting that I turned in my keys and reported that I will not be returning to the ESC while it is locked. I no longer have any need to gain access to any District site since I am no longer on emergency rotation and have so few days remaining of service. I suspect you likely misunderstood Gary because I also have the utmost regard for his ability to relay critical messages and building concerns and I am confident that he reported the facts, they just weren't entirely heard.
In future, I would recommend that you make direct contact with the individual from whom you require critical information. I will continue to check my account access throughout the day and over the weekend. Once I can see what my schedule holds, I will happily meet the obligations contained therein.
Additionally, I am hopeful that someone documented the many calls on my voicemail before it was deleted.
Brian to Mark on June 8 at 10:15 AM
Your computer will be turned back on shortly. I acted on information as it was represented to me and asked to have the computer secured as I would for any employee upon departure from employment.
Mark to Donovan on June 11, 2007 4:55 PM
Subject: Parting is such sweet sorrow.
I never received any password and sat quietly at my desk without internet access or the ability to check email, my calendar or voicemail. Today was a day as a volunteer. My last day of effective employment was Thursday, June 7, 2007 - and even that was only the morning hours. Brian claimed that he never received a password from you. No need to worry. I just wish I could have done more during my final day of service for the District.
Editorial: When my district email account was terminated, I continued seeking clarification by way of mark@esd15.org. I was not able to see any of the many appointments I had coordinated with developers, parent groups and contractors in anticipation of my departure. As you may imagine, the last few days of work tend to be rather heavily booked. Brian had access to my calendar, just no concept of actually proposing a meeting via Outlook (and you don't need access to propose a meeting). Unlike what had been suggested previously in an HR tactics entry, I did not book up space in my calendar. There were plenty of openings and I would have met at any time - day or night.
Throughout most of my career I have been applying techniques from Industrial Psychology to help large software development teams improve their productivity and, more importantly, stop making serious mistakes. I am usually called in when there have been a few disasters and the project is in risk of failing. Sometimes it does fail and there is nothing that I, nor anyone else, can do about it. Fortunately, there are also times when process improvement can play a vital role in helping to bring a project to success. Overcoming resistance to change is the first skill that anyone in the process improvement field must understand and learn to use as an effective tool. Read on if the coming year is your time to help bring about effective change, for the better, in your organization.
