Effort to Recall Andrea Merida Underway

There’s really no reason that a freshman member of the Denver School Board should be getting as much publicity as Andrea Merida has received in the last year. But then again, there’s really no reason that a Denver School Board member should have made so many pointless, and avoidable, mistakes in less than one year.

So it is that the large Denver newspaper is reporting that a recall effort has begun to remove Merida from the Denver School Board. We can’t say we’re surprised at this; we wrote in late July that her political career was probably coming to an end sooner than she expected. As we said after it was revealed that Merida had been working for the Andrew Romanoff campaign in a paid position, at the same time that she was openly attacking Sen. Michael Bennet (who was the former Denver Schools Superintendent):

Merida seems to think it is an important point that she endorsed Romanoff before she was hired by his campaign, which, of course, is completely irrelevant. And her defiant “to suggest that my work on the Denver Board of Education is for sale” statement misses the point that it was her own nondisclosure that brought up the question in the first place.

The fact that she was a paid staffer for the campaign trying to bring down the former head of Denver Public Schools, and did not disclose this, all the while politicizing the DPS board’s policymaking in ways that directly sought to benefit the campaign she was employed by, provokes grave questions about Andrea Merida’s fitness to serve in any capacity. The fact that Merida barely seems to understand why it was wrong in the first place only makes those questions grow louder.

Once the petition language is certified, supporters of the recall (led by community activist Jose Silva) have 60 days to collect 4,032 signatures from registered voters living in Merida’s District 2 (which is Southwest Denver, South of 6th Ave. and West of I-25), which is not really an onerous task. If sufficient signatures are gathered, a two-part ballot would be presented to voters; one question would be to approve the recall, with the second question a choice between a new group of candidates.

Merida has stumbled over her own feet literally from day one on the School Board, and we’d be surprised if she’s still on the Board this time next year.

114 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Jack Burden says:

    Personally I’d love to see Andrea go. I’d be thrilled if she was recalled.

    But her gaffes, while incredibly stupid and ill-natured, don’t really matter to voters. A recall election is such a headache, and frankly, I don’t think this effort’s organizers will be able to unseat Andrea. Unless you could get a big name as the candidate in the recall and run it like a standard campaign, Andrea will stay.

    Again, her mistakes and grating personality probably don’t matter to the average voter. That’s why she’ll keep her seat. Her future in politics is over, though. There’s no more upward momentum for Andrea, anywhere.  

  2. Libertad says:

    How has she damaged DPS students …

  3. G Pulviczek says:

    Once the petition language is certified, supporters of the recall (led by community activist Jose Silva) have 60 days to collect 4,032 signatures from registered voters living in Merida’s District 2

    Since most school districts vote on Directors at-large (i.e. – you vote for all the Directors on your ballot no matter which Director District you live in) – I believe that recall petitions can be signed by registered voters who live anywhere in DPS.

    Unless DPS elects Directors differently than most of the rest of the school districts in Colorado do…

      • G Pulviczek says:

        CRS 1-12-103, Petition for Recall:

        Eligible electors of a political subdivision may initiate the recall of an elected official by signing a petition which demands the election of a successor to the officer named in the petition. The petition shall contain a general statement, consisting of two hundred words or less, stating the ground or grounds on which the recall is sought. The statement is for the information of the electors who shall be the sole and exclusive judges of the legality, reasonableness, and sufficiency of the ground or grounds assigned for the recall. The ground or grounds shall not be open to review.

        Usually, the whole school district is the subdivision, and therefore any registered voter in the school district can sign the petition.

          • dwyer says:

            I wish to hell people who don’t live in Denver would not chime in unless they take the time to educate themselves about the district, its political set up and its history.

            Merida is intelligent and her removal would be a real loss to the non-bennet faction on the school board. However, I think taking the money from Romanoff and not disclosing it  was wrong, albeit legal.  My concern about her political involvement as well as that of Pena and the others on the board is it makes partisan politics a factor in how parents react to their elected officials.

            Merida should have been better informed.  Once she took a stand, then she should have known that she could have become a target.  Caesar’s wife and all that.

            I supported her decision to take her office in time to vote on one of the issues of which she ran.  I did not support her paid involvement with the Romanoff campaign and her  failure to disclose.  The children of Denver, as usual, are the losers.

            • catpuzzle says:

              Is the big problem. Pena is publicly transparent about her figurehead involvement with Bennet’s campaign. Merida wasn’t. She has shown she simply cannot be trusted.  

              • sxp151 says:

                I can understand disagreeing with Merida’s politics and wanting to overturn the result of a fair election. It’s not noble, but it’s understandable.

                But this isn’t even about anything. It’s like prosecuting a mobster for using a pen instead of a #2 pencil to fill in a government form. Yeah, it’s wrong, and the directions clearly say not to do it, but who gives a shit except someone with another agenda?

            • c rork says:

              I just found out that I’m JUST North of where her district ends! I can’t sign!

              NOOOOoooo!

              Dwyer, you supported her tasteless move she pulled on Michelle Moss, who SUPPORTED HER?

              http://coloradopols.com/showDi

              Thats just cold, man.

              • dwyer says:

                See cr, re:

                tasteless move she pulled on Michelle Moss,

                It is not a tea party or an English Drawing Room comedy.  Merida’s first responsibility was to her constituents, not to anyone else.  Moss had cancer and I am truly sorry for that.  However, as someone who has also had cancer, I don’t think her petty temper tandrum was legitimate, and I have no sympathy for Moss.  Merida tried to talk with her, but Moss didn’t have time before the  meeting.

                Remember, most school boards, including Denver’s in past elections, swear in their new members two or three days after the election is certified.  By state law, the boards have ten days to seat their new members after the election has been certified.  Denver swore in the remaining two new members about two hours BEFORE midnight which was the final deadline.  ALL other school boards in Colorado had long seated their new members before Denver.  The delay, IMHO, was  just crap.

                They did that so the old members could vote yes on a series of issues. Two of which had been in Merida’s platform and she wanted to vote the way she had promised in the election.  WTF is wrong with that???

                • Antonio says:

                  You are right.  Who ever gave her the advice to do that was horrible.  Wasn’t an attorney?

                  • dwyer says:

                    I was pasting cr’s comment.

                    I disagree with cr.  I support Merida taking her elected position in time to vote on the issues on which she had taken a stand during the campaign.  I believe her sole responsibility was to her constituents.  If you think what Merida did was tasteless, then I also disagree with  you.

                    Usually, here on the this blog, we indicate with whom we are in agreement.  That avoids the kind of confusion to which you have contributed.

                    • c rork says:

                      That is why it is so tasteless, Dwyer.

                      Merida’s whole political power move failed, the reforms she opposed passed anyways. If the reform package was rejected, that would be one thing. But all she ended up doing was taking away the last hours of Michelle Moss’ (who, as you mentioned, had cancer) school board career. For nothing!

                      It is very analogous of her opposition to Bennet, no? She accused Bennet of defrauding DPS schools (what was it?) 2 or so days before the caucus. She wrote that editorial in the Unmentionable News Source without saying that she was a staffer!

                      So, she has no allies on the school board other than Jeannie and Arturo. No one wants to work with her.

                      I would like to hear what she has to offer to the district’s children other than partisan grandstanding and mudslinging.

                    • dwyer says:

                      Losing a vote is not tasteless, cr, it is merely losing.  But, Merida also went on the record supporting what she ran on and what her constituents elected her to do.  She illuminated the problem.  Also, Jimenez asked for and got a 30 day extension to further explore a better location for West Prep school. Merida’s vote was critical to passage of that motion.  It allowed a respite to carefully examine what alternatives were available.

                      It was not clear how Nate Eastly was going to vote on the Lake redesign and the movement of West Charter into Lake or if he would have also moved to be seated in time to vote.,,,Something which he had the legal right to do and I believe he did  run on a platform of opposing those changes

                      I believe very strongly in democratic processes.  I despise the attempt to reduce democracy to a manners game. This is what you are attempting to do, IMHO.  I hope to hell you are not one of the playground mommies sitting on committees making decisions for other people’s children.

                      As for Michelle Moss, I was never impressed with her, sick or not.   I had cancer, which I also mentioned, and I never threw a pity party or asked for special consideration.

                      The split on the school board is three to four.  The three are Kaplan, Jimenez and Merida.  The four remaining are

                      Eastly, Sewell, Pena, and Hoyt (I think he is the fourth). The first three supported Romanoff and the last four supported Bennet.  The concern over the DPS pension swap is long standing and was published after the NYTimes ran an article on how vulnerable public entities were who had used this form of funding.  The timing was incidental.  

                      IMHO, it is the responsibility of all board members to work together and to agree or disagree based on the issues and not on partisan politics or playground rivals.

                      Merida has a web site, is very responsive to questions and comments and posts  on other blogs.  She believes that neighborhood schools need to be strengthened.  

                      I believe that Merida was wrong to be a paid staffer for Romanoff and not to disclose that.  It really makes me angry because I think she has impacted negatively her effectiveness on the board.  

                      Now then, cr.  For the record:  Are you a Republican?

                      Would you  or anyone in your family personally benefit, financially, from any of the negotiations due to be done next year on the pension refunding??

                      For the record:  I am a registered Democrat.  I will not benefit from any changes in the bond/loans, etc.  However, I am a Denver voter and so could be impacted by what the Board does.

                    • c rork says:

                      Lets see here: I am not a “playground mommie, sitting on committees and making decisions for other people’s children”.

                      I will benefit indirectly from the refinancing deal; I live in Denver.

                      This recall effort is a direct effect of Merida’s scandal with the Romanoff campaign.

                      You think the timing of her railing against the DPS deal was “incidental”? Are you kidding me? She purposefully politicized the financing deal for Romanoff’s gain.

                      “IMHO, it is the responsibility of all board members to work together and to agree or disagree based on the issues and not on partisan politics or playground rivals.”

                      If you truly believe that, don’t you think she has negatively affected the board with all of her shenanigans?

                      Regardless of your opinion, most people would find her political maneuver utterly shameless. Most people would consider her involvement in the Romanoff campaign a major conflict of interest and one unbecoming of a public official. Most people want a school board in Denver that isn’t sidetracked and stalemated by political posturing and scandals.

                      Ironically, the recall effort is being led by Jose Silva, who is not of the highest moral character.

                    • dwyer says:

                      Most people would consider her involvement in the Romanoff campaign a major conflict of interest and one unbecoming of a public official. Most people want a school board in Denver that isn’t sidetracked and stalemated by political posturing and scandals.

                      You are aware that she did nothing illegal, right?  Also, you are aware that all members of the School Board were involved with the Democratic primary and announced their support for either Bennet or Romanoff. Most either donated money or were fund raisers or both.  Pena is the Treasurer  for Bennet.  Do you consider that a conflict of interest? Why or more importantly, why not?

                      Define “most people.”  And, how are you authorized to speak for them?  

                      You think the timing of her railing against the DPS deal was “incidental”? Are you kidding me? She purposefully politicized the financing deal for Romanoff’s gain

                      How do you know Merida’s motivation?  The first NYTimes article preceded the letter of concern, signed  not only by Merida, but also Jimenez and Kaplan.

                      Words like “shenanigans” and “who is not of the highest moral character” are inappropriate in a serious discussion.

                      Your characterizations makes you sound like an Irish washerwoman, and while not a washer woman, I am Irish and know of where I speak.

                      I believe that Merida should have disclosed that she was a paid consultant for Romanoff and I have said so.  But I find the pileon distasteful. I would be sorry to lose her voice on the board when it comes time to revisit the bond issue.

                    • c rork says:

                      But now she has her tweet about not obeying state open meeting laws in Denver’s newspaper of record.

                      This is a trend of behavior.

                    • vandie says:

                      I sent her an email asking her to vote yes on the reproductive curriculum resolution, and not only did she email me back to say she was voting yes, but she also emailed me afterward to tell me the resolution had passed.  And I don’t even live in her district.

  4. catpuzzle says:

    And there are serious issues.

    And there are her petty issues that have stood in the way of serious issues.

    It’s unfortunate that even though she’s been screwing with kids lives all across Denver, only some people can get rid of her. Luckily, I can contribute to the effort to get rid of her. Which I happily will.  

    • jpsandscl says:

      “screwing with kids lives”??? I mean really! Give me a break!

      It’s not like DPS was doing that great under the esteemed leadership of Theresa Pena and Michael Bennet now, is it?

      Frankly, this is still a rehash of the just fought primary. When are people going to give it a rest?

      • MADCO says:

        this has nothing to do with Romanoff/Bennet.

        This is about DPS neighbors and opponents of Merida.

        When exactly has DPS done great?  It’s a challenging district and it’s Board needs to focus and be serious about the district.  I’m not qualified to opine on whether Merida has done that or not.  At least a few neighbors believe she hasn’t.

      • c rork says:

        the district has a myriad of problems to deal with. It can simply not afford Merida’s distractions when they need pragmatic solutions to DPS’ problems.

        Can anyone list a reason why she SHOULD be on the board. Does anyone think this is the last time we will see her in the news?

        I don’t care if you were a AR/MB supporter. What are her positive contributions to the board?

         

        • StrykerK2 says:

          she was elected.  Just saying.  Frankly I don’t care much one way or the other, but your statement is pretty retarded.

        • jpsandscl says:

          I would personally like someone to rock the boat a bit harder at the DPS BOD. How many years of these management school types coming in with their whiz-bang “Denver Plans” and exotic complex financial instruments which don’t really accomplish much will it take before someone really starts asking the hard questions. And that includes questions about DPS’ finances.

          • c rork says:

            That she contributes by bringing contrast to the board?

            My impression is that she does question a lot, but she only succeeds in polarizing the board and making any compromise impossible.

            Do you think her conduct has been acceptable for a school board member? Does she deserve this recall effort?

            • jpsandscl says:

              polarizing the board and making compromise more difficult (not impossible) are not necessarily foregone conclusions as bad things. Maybe the board does need to stop and think hard about some decisions which have been taken lightly in the past.

              And I also think she represents the constituency that put her there, whether other constituencies like it or not.

              So no, she doesn’t deserve to be recalled.

  5. dwyer says:

    Does anyone know if this is the same Silva?  

  6. BlueSkies says:

    The problem with Andrea Merida is that she’s lacking the political and moral compass to be effective.  Seeing nothing wrong with the way she bullied her peers in the early days of her tenure on the school board is a problem.  So is seeing nothing wrong with being and undisclosed shill for her senate candidate.  She may have great ideas for education, but the drama involved in her decision-making processes isn’t something the rest of us should be subjected to.

    • sxp151 says:

      You disagree with her positions, fine. Be honest about it. The other stuff is just a trumped-up excuse to overturn a fair election.

    • dwyer says:

      Merida never bullied her peers.  Her responsibility was to represent her constituents.  I think she ran into the gender/racial wall.  Nice girls don’t speak up kind of crap.

      She always articulated her position well.  


      but the drama involved in her decision-making processes isn’t something the rest of us should be subjected to.

      What the hell does that mean?  The lady was “uppity?”

      Now, Merida did disclose she was supporting romanoff, as did Kaplan and Jimenez.  Pena also disclosed that she was supporting Bennet and was the unpaidTreasurer for his campaign. I believe that the other members of the BOE were also Bennet supporters and did not hide that fact.

      What Merida did not disclose was that she was a highly paid consultant for Romanoff at the time she wrote a partisan column for the Post.

      • MADCO says:

        media contributions and media coverage, I don’t get that impression.  

        I don’t know why the sponsor/leader  of the recall is challenging her position, but I get the impression that people would rather the Board focus on the DPS and working seriously on finding common ground with the other directors to advance DPS.  That Merida got a lot of attention for doing other things seems to be the problem, at least to those to whom she is a problem.

        • jpsandscl says:

          DPS BOD is an unpaid position. She is entitled to a full life outside DPS BOD, including working for and supporting political candidates. I am sure there is nothing in the rules of the board prohibiting that. The only conflicts I could see for a Director would be financial relationships with suppliers and poterntial suppliers to DPS. Not so much elected officials or candidates.

          • MADCO says:

            Religion, marital status, marital infidelity, race, sexual orientation, gender identification, prior work history, debate technique and/or speech making skills, height, physical attractiveness, physical ability, race, national origin, and on and on and on.

            I tend to agree with you- but here in Colorado (as in many states) those initiating a recall need not show grounds or cause.  It’s stupid but it is what it is.

            • jpsandscl says:

              and I predict this will go exactly nowhere. I can’t see over 4 thousand registered voters in that DPS district even signing the petition.

            • droll says:

              What bothers me about this is that it wasn’t even started by “voters” in this case.  Just some ass with an ax to grind.  Strange because he’s complaining about the same.

              She is my member and I didn’t vote for her, but would now.  Just out of spite.  While I wholeheartedly encourage discussion about any political figure, I have a huge problem with people demanding things from other’s representation.  Go bitch at your own official.

              BTW, I’m ranting to you, not at you.

  7. oldbenkenobi says:

    She is the low-hanging fruit.

    We know her real crime was questioning the Bennet-Boasberg deal.  And we know Theresa Pena led the charge to keep the details of that deal hidden from the public.  Pena is the one who should be recalled.

  8. Prog-Matic says:

    She is so incredibly unprofessional and aggressive, she has no place in office. If you think she’s that way “for the kids” you’re a fool. She has big-time political ambition and the school board is just her first step. She must be stopped now. If she is elected to any higher office she will create more problems for the Dems.

    Andrea is increasing despised for her bad attitude and not because she supported AR or opposes Boasberg.

    Yeah, a recall will probably not work but it should serve notice that her time as an elected official is coming to a close. I hope she kept her day job.

  9. Antonio says:

    Here is a link to his Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/JOSEOB… Really Jose are you changing your name to try to win one of the 6 races you have already lost over the years. Hey maybe 7 is the charm. I do not think that Denver voters are stupid, do you think they are stupid? This is less about a recall and more about Jose getting noticed.

  10. Antonio says:

    wow Jose realized how stupid it was to call himslef JoseObama and changed his name on his FB page.  One smart thing he has done.  

  11. Antonio says:

    does anyone know how to post a pic on pols

  12. dwyer says:

    As always, I am grateful to Dan Willis’ expertise and his willingness to share.

    This is my question:  On a recall campaign, when do the people organizing the recall petition drive (and election, if petition is successful) have to post their contributors?

    The reason I ask is there are two groups which might benefit from this recall action who have nothing to do with education, per se.

    1) Bennet has to come out of Denver with a huge majority if he has any chance of winning.  Insofar as this recall fight could reopen the bennet-romanoff split, it could depress the GOTV as well as the actual Democratic vote in Denver.

    ADVANTAGE:  Republicans

    2) The seating Denver BOE is going to have to revisit the controversial pension deal next year because some terms are up for renegotiation in 2011.   Merida has raised concerns about the deal.  So those supporting the Bennet/Boasberg deal may just want her off the board.

    ADVANTAGE:  Boasberg et. al.

    Let me stress, there is nothing illegal or even unethical about this.  And I could be completely wrong about motives.  However, I would like to know who is funding the recall.

    Disclaimer:  BOE elections are non-partisan. I would like to see policy which would keep board members from being involved in any partisan elections while on the board.

    • Dan Willis says:

      I went back to work recently at the Denver Election Division’s office. If the recall effort does indeed submit their petitions, there is a high liklihood I may be involved with the verification of them, and helping wiht the organization of the potential recall election.

      With that in mind, it would be inappropriate for me to comment on any aspect of the recall effort.

      The laws surrounding campaign finance are in the statutes in Title 1, Article 45, if anyone wants to read up and comment.  

      • droll says:

        And no, I don’t say that to all the gay lumberjack looking guys.  😉

        @dwyer (in no way related to Dan’s post whatsofuckingever) – Looks like it.

        (6) Any issue committee whose purpose is the recall of any elected official shall file a committee registration with the appropriate officer within ten business days of receiving its first contribution. Reports of contributions and expenditures shall be filed with the appropriate officer within fifteen days of the filing of the committee registration and every thirty days thereafter until the date of the recall election has been established and then fourteen days and

        seven days before the recall election and thirty days following the recall election.

        Similar language for the candidate committee defending.  So if a committee is formed, we’ll know in due time.

        http://www.sos.state.co.us/pub

        Still @dwyer – Technically Kaplan brought up the initial concerns over the deal… well before anyone was even appointed to a certain other seat.  It’s also worth pointing out that three of the seven members have officially requested a detail accounting of the deal (as is their right) and, AFAIK, have yet to receive anything but Boasberg’s assurances that everything is fine.  Not only is this accounting their right, but also ultimately their responsibility.

        (Not @dwyer anymore) So, just to be clear, I’m not calling politics or anyone a liar, rather suggesting that the best way to shut this abhorrent(?) woman up is to make the details of the public deal public.  Then, if she doesn’t quiet down, everyone may resume shaking their fists at the outlandishness of the request.  Until then… stfu.

  13. SW DEM says:

    I am a concerned constituent of Ms. Merida and I live in her district. We demand the recall and request transparency in all matters pertaining to our children who are attending public schools in Ms. Merida’s district. We the electors of Denver Public Schools District 2 hold Mrs. Merida accountable for directly being financially compensation for her participation in a political race and holding a position with financial compensation in a political campaign during her elected public office. We also believe that on the grounds of unethical conduct and unbecoming behavior of an elected public official and failure to perform duties.

    This is not a personal attack against who supported which candidate in the senate race but the ethics and conduct of Mr. Merida. For those who are excusing her knowledge about receiving financial compensation is foolish. First rules of understanding when you are elected to any public office, you are no longer a private citizen. One must understand that you are being watched and “earning” money well in public office is unethical and unmoral. Ms. Merida believes what she did was not wrong is an understatement. She has been vey aggressive and unprofessional since she took her office.

    We the community of South West Denver are no longer allowing her to act in such manner and we are standing united to fight for the rights of our children because ultimately they do not have a voice but we as a community do.

    @ Antonio, obviously you have a personal vendetta against Mr. Silva. You need to take that up on your own personal time and direct those comments directly to Mr. Silva. The matter at hand is not Mr. Silva himself but the education of our children. I ask you to reframe from any further comments because you logic he is without merit.  

  14. survivor says:

    I don’t think her petty temper tandrum was legitimate, and I have no sympathy for Moss.  Merida tried to talk with her, but Moss didn’t have time before the  meeting.

    I want to set the record straight.  I never asked for anyone’s sympathy during my battle with cancer and I am not asking for it now. My “petty temper tantrum” was nothing more than an honest reaction to being blindsided by a person I had endorsed and supported.  I did speak to Andrea the afternoon after she had been sworn in but before the meeting.  She never mentioned what she had done.  She did leave me a cell message timed 3 minutes before the meeting began. I didn’t listen to that message until after the meeting. It is inaccurate to say that I did not have time to talk to her.  She never took the time to be honest and open with me.

    I have nothing to do with this recall effort.  I don’t know any of the people involved and have not encouraged them. This has nothing to do with me.

    Michelle Moss

    • c rork says:

      for posting. It bothered me when it was characterized that way.

    • dwyer says:

      I had understood that Merida approached you before the meeting started and you said that you did not have time and would talk to her after the meeting.  If I am mistaken, I apologize.

      Didn’t I hear you on the radio after the meeting in which Merida was sworn in, criticizing her for not allowing you your last meeting?   That is what I was referring to.

      I have heard others, not you, cite your cancer as a reason you should have been given special treatment.

      I never thought you had anything to do with the recall nor did I say so.

      Perhaps what you could tell us, Ms. Moss, is why the Board delayed the full ten days before seating the new board members.  I have never heard an official explanation.  Thank you.

      • dwyer says:

        I have some more questions and I would hope that Michelle Moss would return to this blog and continue to converse.

        In addition to explaining why the Board waited the full ten days to swear in the new members, I have the following questions:

        1) You spoke of supporting Merida and I am wondering why?

        What qualities did she have that you felt would make her a good BOE member for the parents and children of the SW District?

        2) How did her decision to be sworn in early change your opinion of those qualities which made you support her in the first place?

        3) Did you have an expectation that she “owed” you something for your support?

        4) Had Merida made any promises to you about specific issues in exchange for your support?

        Thank you.

      • survivor says:

        Andrea chose to speak to me at the moment the board meeting was to start.  I could not at that time have walked away to have a private meeting with her.  She had over 4 hours from the time she went to the judge to when the meeting started to speak to me.  She did speak to me after being sworn in and before the meeting and did not tell me what she had done. Draw your own conclusions on her efforts to talk to me.

        I did not have a role in deciding when the meeting would take place.  I can say that the Thanksgiving holiday played a role in the delay.  People went out of town and it was felt that everyone should be there.

        As I look at it now, Andrea being sworn in ahead of the meeting was really not the problem. It was the disrespectful way that she did it that was the problem.  During her campaign, I supported her in every way I could. She made the choice in how to communicate with me.  She chose to blindside me not the other way around.

        • dwyer says:

          If she had told you beforehand, what would you have done?

          Do you think that anyone would have tried to find a legal way to stop her from taking the seat?

          What do you think was accomplished by your tour of the media complaining about her?

          • vandie says:

            I remember reading in Westword that the League of Women Voters wanted the old board to let the new board take that vote on Lake.  I also remember that you and Jill Conrad basically were saying that the new board wasn’t smart enough to do that.

            Here’s the Westword article: http://blogs.westword.com/late

            Seems like you were dead set against talking it out in the first place.

            • vandie says:

              Weren’t you the board vice president?  Your successor said back then that DPS broke the law by waiting as long as they did.

              http://archive.squarestate.net

              What happened?

              • dwyer says:

                Thank you for the links, vandie.  I did not realize that the League of Women Voters had asked the Denver BOE to change the order of the agenda so that the new members could vote on the proposed changes.  To my mind, that adds a whole new dimension to what happened.

                @Ms. Moss, this quote is also very revealing:

                As I look at it now, Andrea being sworn in ahead of the meeting was really not the problem. It was the disrespectful way that she did it that was the problem

                Disrespectful?  What was disrespectful?  That seat on the BOE does not belong to you, it belongs to the people of the SW District.  I believe that your attitude and reaction was the real problem.  Based on everything I have now read, it seems reasonable to me that if she had told you in the hours before the  meeting, there would have been some kind of move to prevent her from voting. I don’t know what that might have been.  However, any legal action could have delayed her taking her seat.

                The suggestion  that Merida “owed” you some kind of consideration that justified your tour of talk radio “dissing” her, is an suggestion which I reject.  In all of this, you never mention the students/parents/constituents of your former district, only your hurt feelings.

  15. SW DEM says:

    @ Ralphie,

    To answer your question, yes they can read and write but until they are 18 years old they cannot vote.  Now do you suggest that our children/teenagers write Ms. Merida letters about her behavior, which I would kindly do.

    Did you not read my entire entry on here? This isn’t about Antonio or Mr. Silva. If this is all you got Ralphie, I really see no more point in taken this any further with you.

    @ Ms. Moss,

    Thank you for your side of the story. And I will second that Ms. Moss in no shape way or form is involved in the recall.

  16. droll says:

    Granted these numbers are from an off year, but here are the results for her election:

    SCHOOL DISTRICT 1 – Director District 2 (72) 72/72 100.00%

    NP – Andrea Merida 5,485 50.53%

    NP – Ismael C. Garcia 5,369 49.47%

    So she’s kind of a jerk, OK, sure, but without doing something more overt (like something substantial that wasn’t passed because of her argument, or unreasonable support of something… neither of which is present here) I don’t see a whole lotta interest.  And it would need interest because these races aren’t interesting.  Just saying.

    http://www.denvergov.org/Porta

  17. sooz63 says:

    Whoever Dwyer is, they are sadly misinformed. First of all, Ms. Merida is the one who was not straight forward with Michelle. They spoke two hours before that fateful board meeting and Andrea did not bring up the awful thing she did.

    As for this “sacred vote” that Andrea promised her constituents, the folks making the loudest noise about Lake were not even her constituents. She claims to care about the Hispanic student with ESL issues, poverty issues, ect… but the very school program that serves this group is the one she is against. To think that after a whole six months of campaigning that she knew better than Michelle regarding reform policy is the very description of hubris. Michelle has spent a career in education and the last 8 years on the board studying reform. And Andrea knew better?

    I am a constituent of Andrea’s, I was unfortunate enough to believe her BS and not only voted for her but endorsed her. You can be sure that I will be much more thorough in vetting any other candidates in the future.

    I also supported Romanoff but my support for him had nothing to do with Andrea. I was appalled by the way she used the school board meetings as her own political forum.

    I have had nothing to do with this recall effort but I sure will be glad to get rid of someone who has done nothing but stir up trouble. She certainly hasn’t brought anything positive about for the ones who need her the most, DPS students.

  18. sooz63 says:

    She won by a whole 116 votes. I’m just saying.

  19. Antonio says:

    Wow. Mr. Silva can not even fill out a simple form.  He needs some DPS students to help him with grammer and filling out a form. Recall attempt rejected! Post said “Denver city officials Thursday rejected the recall effort against Denver school-board member Andrea Merida for mostly clerical reasons.”

    http://www.denverpost.com/sear

  20. dpsparent says:

    The recall is the kind of parent activism we need! I hope the recall is successful and she is replaced with someone far less controversial and far more professional. Merida is the Al Capone of the school board. She came in with her baseball bat swinging, first at Michelle Moss, who mentored and supported her and helped her gain her position on the board, and now at the superintendent, who is doing his level best for DPS. At least Mary Seawell had the integrity to disclose her donation to Michael Bennet’s campaign. Merida represents everything that is wrong with the school board and has turned it into a three-ring circus. Let’s not forget the high-priced off-off site (as in CO Springs) retreat with a high-priced therapist to help the board deal with the aftermath of her entree to the school board. Her conduct is disgraceful, unethical, tyrannical, and outrageous. I am embarrassed that we have such a monster on our school board.  

    • GuerinLeeGreen says:

      DPS parent? More like anti-teacher, anti-union sock puppet.

      Let’s set the record straight. Merida did not force her way on to the board. She took her seat legally, and prevented DPS from taking actions illegally, after her election was certified. That’s why DPS had to go back and revote on issues after the other two newly elected board members stood up. Following the law may be too nuanced for you, but don’t pollute the blogosphere with lies.

      Jose Silva, the guy who is “organizing” the recall, is a serial campaign law violator, who still has not paid fines he incurred while running for HD5 earlier this year. Two of the three people he dug up for this recall aren’t registered voters, according the City Clerk, who threw out Silva’s petition.

      This recall has the same level of credibility as many of Merida’s critics, who neither understand what has transpired at DPS, nor can recognize political hit job when they see one.

      • dpsparent says:

        GuerinLeeGreen, I am not anti-teacher or anti-union and I am not a sock puppet. You are too quick to judge and dismiss my comments without really considering them. What you did do, however, was show me this is not a forum for open discussion, just a flaming free for all from black and white, “if you’re not part of the solution you’re part of the problem” type thinkers.

        What Merida did was legal, but it was also unethical and unprofessional. She did so without informing her fellow inductees, which made it very clear she is NOT going to be a team player.

        Just as what Merida did was legal, what Jose Silva is doing is legal as well. Whether it will bear fruit remains to be seen. I hope it does, as I see Merida as divisive, unprofessional, and outrageous.

        Merida’s behavior has cast a long and ugly shadow on the efforts of the school board, which should focused on improving the district, not one over-the-top media attention-grabbing antic after another.

        I do not approve of the offsite kumbaya. I believe Merida is trouble, pure and simple, and her unprofessional behavior will do more harm than good.

        And, jpsandscl, I am no fan of the practice of having a mayor appoint a superintendent; the position should be elected. If that were the case, the eminently qualified Rob Stein would be our superintendent and DPS would look quite different, wouldn’t it?

        What are you doing to make things better, other than feeling morally superior by blasting my comments on a blog?

        Are you working to amend No Child Left Behind? Are you involved in your childrens’ classrooms or in Great Education Colorado?

        I am no fan of the DPS curricula or of No Child Left Behind, but it’s what we’ve got and what we have to deal with. I have seen DPS fail with one of my children, so I know firsthand how horrible that can be.

        So, what is the alternative? Blasting me on a web site or rolling up your sleeves and doing something about it? Be the change. I dare you.

    • jpsandscl says:

      justisn’t good enough! But how would we ever know? Because the board chose to hire him as Superintendent of a major inner city school district in America without first conducting a nationwide search for the best candidate we could get.

      So take your bullshit and start walking. This is about my kids (they attend DPS schools), and I can tell from first-hand experience that DPS fails on many levels, starting with the curricula.

      And by-the-by DavidThi808, I have generally found the teachers to be first rate and very industrious and concerned with a very few notable exceptions. It is the shackles they are in from administration which hamper them more than incompetence.

    • droll says:

      But I’ll survive… same as you.

      Let’s not forget the high-priced off-off site (as in CO Springs) retreat with a high-priced therapist to help the board deal with the aftermath of her entree to the school board.

      And this is Merida’s fault how?  Are you suggesting that she chased every shrink out of Denver just to stick it to the taxpayers?

      OTOH, I do appreciate this theory that tactless acts are now mandatory retreats.  Will you be paying for my trip?

      I do have to point out that this non-disclosure is even a bit ridiculous.  It was an Op-Ed sent to a major newspaper without a disclaimer.  OK, fine.  I can’t believe that her work on the Romanoff campaign was such a huge secret that no one caught it!  Oh wait, they did.  Because it wasn’t a secret.  So leaving it off was, at worst, the poorest attempt to not disclose ever.

      Your post offends me on many more levels.  Many, many more levels.  But I have to make dinner and don’t have the time, energy, or drive to rant at you.  Particularly because I know this was a drive by rant from a shill.  D- for effort.

      • dpsparent says:

        Hey, Droll. I’m not “suggesting that she chased every shrink out of Denver just to stick it to the taxpayers.” I am citing this as an example of the aftermath of her unprofessional behavior and a poor use of our already scant resources, okay?

        I think you do want to rant at me and that’s all you want to do. A blog is a conversation, not an all-out attack on someone whose opinion you think is wrong because it isn’t your opinion, with the end goal of making yourself feel morally superior by labeling them a shill, then shutting down them down.  

        • droll says:

          You didn’t address any point anyone made to any of your posts.  Instead you whined because people are so mean.

          But let’s go back to that retreat thing.  Now you’re suggesting that it was Merida’s decision to a) have it and b) have it somewhere so expensive?  I agree that it was a huge waste of taxpayer money.  I also have to point out that this particular board takes retreats often.  I’ve only ever heard Merida complain about them because concerns are never addressed during them.  So who’s what’s wrong with the Board after all?

          I don’t expect a real answer, just hoping you’ll take this opportunity to learn about researching before ranting in public places.  If your bruised ego can’t take it, hit alt and F4 at the same time.  Okay?

          • vandie says:

            It’s like some people don’t read the newspapers.  It was well reported back then that the retreat had already been planned in advance and since they were attending that conference anyway, they decided to tack on one meeting.  It had nothing to do with any one member.

      • vandie says:

        It was well known that she supported AR.  Why didn’t they just do their job and ask her?

        • droll says:

          They didn’t have to ask her.  It was already common knowledge.  That’s why the piece was actually published with the disclaimer.  In other words, the public never saw it without the disclaimer.

  21. vandie says:

    You DO realize, don’t you, that “Jose” Silva will cause a special election that the voters have to pay for, right?  What’s the cost of a Denver mail-in ballot election? Around a cool million, right?

    You probably don’t realize that Joe Silva, the serial campaign finance violator, has THOUSANDS of fines racked up with the SoS for failure to file campaign finance reports during his comedic attempt to run for HD5 state rep.  He never even made it out of the caucuses, and when he showed up at county assembly, he got one single vote.  I wonder if that was his.

    I think he’s doing this because he wants some “enemy” of Merida’s to pay him to run a campaign against her.  Problem is that diverting funds from a campaign to pay your own fines is a FELONY.

    Wait…that sounds like the fundraiser he held the day before dropping out of the 2007 school board race.  He never returned that money, nor did he ever buy yard signs or lit.  That’s another FELONY too!

    Your sexism is showing, Pols.  This knucklehead doesn’t even live in her district, nor did he have enough brains to figure out you need registered voters in that district to even file the paperwork.  

    • Nugget says:

      …for not digging into Silva’s intentions with the recall. He frequently hides his actions behind vague notions of the “greater good” and his own self-annointed position as the “community’s voice”. His ethical track record provides ample fodder for skeptics.

      Whatever he hopes to gain personally from this divisive crusade (as this thread clearly shows), he should realize he will lose more in the long run. I think it’s safe to say that he can kiss goodbye any hopes of succeeding Arturo Jimenez on the school board or running for elected office again as a Democrat.    

  22. BlueMusic says:

    The following was posted on squarestate.net. According to them this is a part of the offical response, squarestate has also posted the entire letter….

    8. In addition to the deficiencies stated above,we note the following irregularities (although not technical defects):

    a. The petition contains inconsistent references to the name of the political jurisdiction and the office that is the subject of the recall. the petition should use a consistent, accurate title for the office and the official you seek to recall throughout the document.

    b. The signature lines are printed in small font. Please consider enlarging the font to the extent possible for the benefit of the electors.

    c. Throughout the petition contains numerous typos, punctuation errors and grammatical errors. We strongly suggest you proofread the entire petition.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.