Do the issues have merit?

[Frankzilch]

I thought I made this post earlier today but I must have closed the window instead of hitting the "submit" button because I see no sign of it anywhere.

I raised the issue of whether Ron Sartin has a legitimate beef concerning the Waukegan school board. Mr. Sartin has himself thrust this issue into the court of public opinion here on this forum. If his allgations are based in fact then we should seek a resolution to these problems. On the other hand if these allegations are without merit then taxpayer money is being wasted because the board has to consult legal council. It is in the interest of the taxpayers of district 60 to know whether these allegations have merit or not. Personally I see signs that, at least some of, the issues do not have merit. I have not heard anyone other than Mr. Sartin allege that these issues have merit. Does anyone have anything that tends to lend credibility to the issues that Mr. Sartin has brought forth? Does anyone have anything that tends to diminish Mr. Sartins credibility on these same issues? The matter of whether these issues have merit or not can certainly be discussed here, correct?

[Locke]

Given his methods in spreading word of his issues with the district as well as his tendency to lash out at others, I tend to lean more towards "upset spouse of former employee with an axe to grind". I have nothing to diminish his credibility, but he's doing a good job of that himself by constantly reminding everyone about his grievances with the district.

[freedomisntfree]

Given his methods in spreading word of his issues with the district as well as his tendency to lash out at others, I tend to lean more towards "upset spouse of former employee with an axe to grind". I have nothing to diminish his credibility, but he's doing a good job of that himself by constantly reminding everyone about his grievances with the district.

Style over substance is a logical fallacy which occurs when one emphasises the way in which the argument is presented, while marginalising (or outright ignoring) the content of the argument. In some cases, the fallacy is employed as a form of ad hominem attack. <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_over_substance_fallacy">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_over ... ce_fallacy</a><!-- m -->


Ad hominem argument is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or attacking the person who proposed the argument (personal attack) in an attempt to discredit the argument. It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem</a><!-- m -->

It could be that I am a citizen AND a spouse of a former employee seeking justice for the community in this forum and justice for my spouse in other forums. I believe that you have the right to know about violations of district policy, state law and federal law by the disrtrict. For obvious reasons the district does not and they are still spending your money to keep you from knowing the truth. Thanks for your post!

[JazminH]

Mr. Free: you can talk about your "fallacy" and conspiracies all you want. But maybe people are not jumping to help you because they don't want you to attack them too! There is no shortage of issues needing help in this town and you have not sold yours very well!

[freedomisntfree]

The question was do the issues have merit? Apparently Waukegan Public School District Superintendent Dr. Donaldo Batiste thought they did because he "tried" to straighten them out with the board including with current Board President Michael Rodriquez. Waukegan Public School District Superintendent Dr. Donaldo Batiste was unable to get current Board President Michael Rodriquez and the rest of the board to stop violating district policy, state law and federal law. Again, the question was do the issues have merit? Are you calling Waukegan Public School District Superintendent Dr. Donaldo Batiste a liar when he blamed the board? Or are you calling board member Hawn a liar when he stated that the board was behind Batiste 100% when Batiste blamed the .........Board!

My claims are based on facts and the conspiracies are also based on facts. Because they are factual, Michael Rodriquez supporters are relegated to Ad hominem arguments against me to deflect these serious allegations. I appreciate you adding a few more excuses including, I might attack them for helping, no shortage of issues and I haven't sold it "very well" to the list. In my last post and many others I have explained that I am posting here to inform and ask for the help of the community to help the community to defend itself from the actions of the senior administration, board attorney and board. Anyone that wants to be informed can listen to Batiste and Hawn at <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkkXGtdnXLY">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkkXGtdnXLY</a><!-- m --> or just go to youtube and search on batiste hawn and waukegan.

Thanks again for your input.

[JazminH]

Just because you calim to be "factual" doesnt make it so. Many have listened to your "evidence" and think it proves nothing except you illegally recorded.

[freedomisntfree]

Thanks for your response! What did Batiste tell you about being recorded? Did he tell you that he was told in writing over and over that all of our future conversations would be recorded? Did he tell you that when he spoke with me he had a tape recorder with the red light on pointed at him? Did he tell you that he volunteered his information knowing that he was being recorded? Did you know it was an open meeting?

Who's lying? Is it Batiste blaming the board? Or is it Hawn stating they support Batiste 100% - blaming the board? Say what you will but one of them is lying!

Have you asked Hawn or Batiste who's lying? Even more importantly, does it matter who is lying? If Batiste was lying in an official matter involving violations of district policy, state law and federal law - do you really care why he lied? If Hawn was lying in an official matter involving violations of district policy, state law and federal law - do you really care why he lied? Is there anything that justifies lying in an official matter before them?

Batiste had the opportunity in a recording that he KNEW would be going public and would be used against him to say anything that he chose to say, give any excuse that he could think of, make up anything that he wanted to, including saying NOTHING or REFUSING to answer and he chose to say, "I TRIED" and blamed the board for the continuing violations of district policy, state law and federal law because HE TRIED TO STOP IT! And then by some miracle Hawn says that Batiste just lied because, "they support Batiste 100%". One of them is lying.

Thanks again for your input!

[JazminH]

I don't know Hawn Batiste or Rodrigez. I don't believe your recordings shows any proof of any illegal activity either. Not every employer disagreement is a horrible crime you know.

[freedomisntfree]

Not every employer disagreement is a horrible crime you know

Your correct, employee disagreements are not a crime. But we didn't claim that this is an employee disagreement. We have made allegations that the board, board attorney and senior administration have falsified time sheets, committed perjury, forged documents, sent those same documents thru the mail and via fax and numerous other violations of state and federal law. Additionally they violated her FLSA and FMLA rights in addition to other violations of her rights.

I don't believe your recordings shows any proof of any illegal activity either

Your correct, the recording alone doesn't show anything except one of them was lying. But why were they lying and what were they lying about? One of them was lying about an official action taken by both the Superintendent and full board in closed and open session. One of them was lying about falsified time sheets, perjury committed by two administrators, forged documents, wire fraud and mail fraud and numerous other violations of state and federal law. Additionally they were lying about violating her FLSA and FMLA rights.

Your so close to the heart of the matter. Why were they lying? Answer: To cover up their crimes! Sometimes it really is that simple. People get away with crimes all the time and no one catches them. What seems to trip up people is the coverup. And that is exactly what happened here. Batiste and Hawn couldn't keep the lies straight and they got caught on tape. Batiste got caught on tape blaming the board for something he says he "tried" to stop. What was the something that he tried to correct and why were they willing to lie about it?

What would happen to their careers if they had to admit to all of you that they had falsified time sheets, committed perjury, forged documents, committed wire fraud and mail fraud and numerous other violations of state and federal law in an attempt to coverup their violatons of her FLSA and FMLA rights? Their careers would be over, they would have put the district in a position of nearly unlimited liability, might be facing jail time and loss of their licenses. And that is why they were lying - to protect themselves.

Thanks for your input!

[Snoopy]

I need to reply to this.
I know Mike Rodriguez, he is one of the kindest and thoughtful men that I know. My question, Why would he not provide due diligence to an issue?
Side note of what I witnessed on Thursday, June 4th. Mike attends graduation ceremony at 9 AM, comes back to work, changes the suit into work uniform. The business man that he is, both personal and school board, tells me he will make a visit to my own child's graduation. Not one he was asked to attend for his duties, but out of personal joy of seeing my daughter celebrate her day! Out of work uniform back to suit to honor my child, giving her a hug as she celebrates her day with a very trusted friend of hers, let alone mine. Then, to my understanding, Annita Hanna was unable to attend, meanwhile Mike went back to work for his business, he was asked if he would be able to attend the 7 or 8PM graduation, because of Hanna's abscence, and of course, this heartless man, attended?
My question that ," Do the issues have merit?" I wonder if I have heard the whole story, and have yet asked. I know this man, and do not question this man and his judgements.
Let us move further. June Maguire strikes me as a kind, compassionate lady. She has been a member of the School Board for many years. She has a record of doing her best for the kids, for many, many years. It is that position that she finds herself re-elected. My question,"Do these issues have merit"? Apperently she was not pursuaded otherwise.
Lets move further. Sonny Garza, whom I know, is a genuine man that cares about the youth of Waukegan in several capacities. This is a man I voted for to bring about change in the direction our children's education is headed.
I could go on and speak about Rita Mayfield-Jedkins, Mark Hawn, Annita Hanna. I won't do this. This obviously was a decision made that was not popular to certain people, again we ask the question," Do the issues have merit?" My response, evidently not to the entire Board of Education of the District 60.
My hope is he was not allowed due process to his complaints. I also understand he has been banned from attending school board meetings, so I begin to wonder if there hasn't been a wrong approach to resolving an obvious trouble of he and family to this entire situation. I do not know that, but know I trust the board to represent my interests as a tax payer in this matter.
Shawn White
(224) 381-2834