No 'amiable parting' for S.F. superintendent

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 2/6/6 | Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross

[SmithL]

The "smooth transition" of power over at the San Francisco school district is turning out to be anything but -- especially after a behind-closed-doors blowup between outgoing Superintendent Arlene Ackerman, her attorney and some school board members.

Officially, the district is saying only that acting Superintendent Gwen Chan is now in charge -- and that henceforth Ackerman, who announced her departure come June and will get $375,000 if she sticks around till then, will be acting in an "advisory" capacity.

Unofficially, however, Ackerman and the district could be on the verge of a very nasty split.

It all has to do with a credit card.

A little while back, someone in the central office apparently told one of the school board members that the district should look into Ackerman's use of a school credit card.

It seems the fact that Ackerman was using the card came as news to some of the board members -- though she's entitled to one under her contract.

Suddenly there was talk at a closed session about wanting to see Ackerman's receipts.

Bear in mind, relations between Ackerman and some of the board members have been anything but warm and fuzzy. For months, they've been at odds over everything from her handling of labor negotiations to her "Dream Schools" initiative, which requires staffers at low-performing schools to reapply for their jobs.

[SmithL]

Your tax dollars at work. San Francisco finally had improvement in their public schools, and they couldn't allow that to happen. I hope Ackerman gets rich off those idiots.

[tom h]

The liberal left eating their own. I love it. The end result will be even worse schools and, finally, a revolution in education in California.

Incidentally, Mrs. Ackerman is a PhD graduate of Harvard's education school and was formerly head of DC Schools. Does this provide a hint of her predilections? San Francisco was stupid to bring in a trophy candidate, minority at that, and think they had fixed all their problems.

[Jack Black]

Why do government pay money like this when they fire people? What a waste. $375,000 as a settlement for doing a bad job. No wonder taxes are so high.

[SmithL]

She has a contract. It would be in the student's best interest for them to keep her as long as she would stay. However, the stupidvisors would rather pay her to go away.

[tom h]

The payout was a condition of her employment. She came in as a minority superstar in her field, and I don't blame her for getting a cash payout section in her employment contract if she is terminated or has to leave in less than three years.

Here's the situation. You have a good solid job, and some d-ckhead liberal from SF (probably gay) flies out to see you and tells you his school district wants to hire you BADLY. You are flattered but you have a house, your husband has a good job, and your kids are established in their school and neighborhood. Why move, with all the hassles of selling one house, buying another, etc?

But the blandishments continue so you give them your terms, which include a lump sum payout if things don't work out and your employment terminates in less than 3, or 5 years. Because it was SF's fault that you were uprooted.

[OldArmy94]

Districts need to stop hiring these eggheads with education degrees and start hiring CEO's, CFO's and others with business accumen. I'm a teacher, too, so you know that I'm not biased against educators--I just know what works and what doesn't.

[ladyjane]

In the interest of accuracy the ed school at Harvard does not give a Ph.D. At least they haven't in the past. She either got an Ed.D. or went to a different school. If it's a Ph.D. then it's Dr. Ackerman.

[SmithL]

I'm a fan of Ackerman. She ran the district like a CEO, AND she got results. Therefore, she was hated by the Teacher's Union and the entrenched bureaucracy. They are running her out of town for being successful, and she deserves better than San Francisco.