CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
July 11, 2011 05:01 PM UTC
57 Comments
One “interesting” revelation in working on the Veteran Court in Colorado is that credit reporting companies scrub law enforcement and jail websites for data on arrests. This info is included on a number of credit reports, and can bite the accused in the ass if they don’t know about it.
One devious thing is that the industry has no requirement to amend the data on their own. It’s up to the accused to go back and clean up their credit history, and since most people aren’t aware it exists, it stays there.
In the case of the clients of the Vets Court, they can enroll in the program, get treatment and have their official court records expunged, but the credit report of their arrest and conviction is still there.
A bill needs to be run to prevent creditors from knowing too much about the reliability and worthiness of those they are potentially extending financing too …. all in the name of consumer protection and transparency right?
Come on Dan, grow up or move to France where the government has ownership stakes throughout most industry sectors and you might get away with your Maxine Wateresque proposal.
….it seems to reflect your view of a libertarian paradise!
Did you drink too much Mountain Dew last night during your dungeon run in WoW? You’re more incoherent than normal…
.
How is requiring a public institution, to notify parents of a matter of PUBLIC record unreasonable?
Haven’t seen you posting in forever!
Arrests are a matter of public record, but an official dissemination of a notice of the arrest is more than just a public record.
It is more than is strictly necessary to protect the students. That’s all that is needed to judge this rule.
++++ Colorado parents expect this. What’s with these Obamybots and their taste for less transparency?
That smiley is for Newsie, not you, Libbie…
It reflects the American belief that one is innocent until proven guilty.
You may disagree, however I find your hysterical hyperbole at odds with your stated support for unions. It is the job of unions to protect their members. A teacher can be destroyed by a false accusation.
vested parents will go the other way and demand to when a teacher is arrested.
I have been trying to convince my compatriots here that the radical right is out to undermine our US Constitution anyway they can….your comments support my fear.
there is no rational thinking behind what you demand.
After a long and thoughtful rule making process?
They are a bi partisan group, right?
1. It is the State Board of Education, not a “commission.”
2. “Bi-partisan” implies equal/balanced representation. They are not. These are partisan elections, and draw a lot of ideologues.
3. They often make decisions quickly and without much sign of thoughtfulness.
By your argument, should the trial also be secret to protect the teachers reputation until “proven guilty”.
A public trial happens after an investigation, with charges the prosecuting attorney is supposed to feel comfortable in supporting, and a reasonable chance of conviction.
A public trial is also supposed to happen without the jury being unduly influenced by publicity surrounding the event. That is less likely to be true if the government is forced to tell a large segment of the community about an alleged action before all the facts are known.
You think the answer to innocent until proven guilty is star chamber proceedings?
You guys get borderline hysterical over the simplest things.
If I get a notice in the mail (or on my e-mail or voice mail) that my child’s teacher has been arrested for speeding, I am not going to worry too much, (unless they are the driver ed teacher)
If the arrest is for a child related abuse crime, I have a right to know the administration is protecting my young children.
All this is is a notice. The arrest is a matter of PUBLIC record. The school is notified under a required notification rule. Extending that rule to include parents, in relevant child safety criminal arrests is reasonable.
I could get the same information if I read the public arrest blotter, or the local newspaper, but I am too busy blogging with you guys to do that. 🙂
if I read the local newspaper . . .”
1. Sounds interesting, what’s this “newspaper” thing you write of?
2. So, if I read you correctly you see this notiification bill, and the expense upon the school system (What was it David used to write about sales tax notifications? . . . something about a dollar of expense per notification?), as an appropriate substitute for the failure of these local “newspapers” to provide something other than American Furniture advertisments?
n/t
Many years ago one of my daughters teachers was arrested, and convicted of 1st degree murder. All of the other parents had the attitude “Well, they wouldn’t have arrested him if he wasn’t guilty!”
It turned out that he WASN’T guilty! It took 3 years but finally the D.A. admitted the error and after he signed all kinds of paperwork saying that he would not sue anyone involved… the school, the city, the D.A. the County, the State, the Governor and whoever else they could think of, he was released. He hadn’t seen his kids for 3 long years and due to nothing that he had done.
One guess as to the color of his skin.
The judge did take an unplanned, early retirement, however.
.
When you get together the four or five Parmelia Electrician and get your last pick, make sure that the one that you opt for is a master electrician or an approved journeyman. Wellard Electrician.
which is one of the legislature’s best things since so many of them are blissfully idea-free.
When teachers get arrested, local media are all over it, for good or for bad.
Tossing another mandate on school districts is just plain silly.
Agree; do you have a cite for that? I’d love to see it. If they’re criticizing TFA, then holy hell, I’m really done with them.
marvelous outcomes of their reform led results over he last 2 decades.
He’s a measurable factoid …. DPS gradates 43.5% of it’s High Schoolers. better yet, it’s not the fault of the teachers, but the collective Bossman does play a part.
Are vouchers really such a bad idea when nearly 60% of high schoolers don’t graduate and your target graduation rate is just north of 50% ?
posting multiple awesomely ungrammatical tirades about the failure of our schools!
L, let me give you a tip on argument strategy: if you can tell us you went to (or are in seventh grade in) DPS, that would be the most powerful argument you could give for your assertion that DPS is a failure.
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek…
I guess they did it at their convention. Maybe worth a post in it’s own right?
I have enough problem with bars to employment for people convicted of an offense (what does smoking weed 20 years ago have to do with much of anything), let alone the mere accusation of a crime.
Nowadays teachers get fired for facebook pages showing them drinking (legally) and for dating antics (when they are single). At the same time, the same people arguing we should can them argue we should pay them like retail clerks at best buy.
Aside from a very few cases, (Sex assault on a child comes to mind) they should be left in the classroom (and not publicly tried in the press or the NIMBY world of parents) until the legal process plays out. Then it should be determined if the offense has a relevant relation to their duties. However, this isn’t the case since Colorado has employment bans for teachers convicted of felonies+.
I am a parent and my view hasn’t changed by having kids. People need to get a grip.
It is limited to crimes relevant to the teacher’s position. Reasonable, I think?
when less intrusive solutions exist and are already in place.
Schools are already notified when arrests happen. Media watch it too. If there’s any reason whatsoever for removing a teacher from the classroom, they will be. And I think that should happen, frankly.
What this is, though, is going further than that. It’s not just about removing them from the classroom. Not even about notifying parents of children who had close contact with the teacher. Instead, it’s a mandate that the school notify every family with children in the school, whenever anything within its scope happens.
There’s no room for common sense here; doesn’t matter if the “arrest” was for some nitpick, outdated homosexuality-related law, or whatever… doesn’t matter if even the media look at it and realize it’s not worth reporting on. If it technically fits in the scope of the policy, the school district MUST send out letters to possibly thousands of families about a teacher’s private life.
If the CEA were not opposing this monstrosity, they would not be doing their job.
Stop exaggerating. The policy covers specific crimes that seem relevant to their position. It specifically excludes plenty of minor stuff that most of us would agree was irrelevant.
Simple question: As a parent of a child, would you want to know that the teacher of your child had been arrested for assault over the weekend? Yes or No?
It’s not enough to say the school will take action on their own. What if they don’t? Although maybe a compromise could be that if the teacher continues teaching parents are notified and told why, I don’t know, I’m open to ideas, whatever.
I do want to know that my school is responsible enough to remove the teacher from being in front of students pending an investigation. What that means is, if the school fails to remove a teacher and then they wind up being convicted, I want those in charge of handling it at the school level removed – that means principals, union officials who prevented the school from taking any sort of precautionary measure…
That goes for the DUI bits, too. If school policy doesn’t automatically put a driver on leave after a DUI, I want to know that. I don’t want to know if someone as arrested and charged by accident for being drunk while in the passenger seat – I want to know that someone was convicted of a DUI offense and the school did nothing while the charge was pending.
In these matters, I would rather see a rule that punishes school officials for failing to properly act in response to such an arrest (and “properly act” doesn’t mean an automatic kneejerk reaction) than publication of the arrest record to every house in the district.
A lot of us don’t trust school administrations to act appropriately – because we’ve seen them take so many brain-dead actions. I agree this should be handled by the district. But we need to know, 100% know, that they will.
If the person winds up guilty, you’ll know. And if that’s not enough, I’d even be okay with a provision that says make the notification if the person winds up guilty and the case goes before an independent review board.
I’ve now proposed two alternatives to this poorly thought out rule. We have yet another alternative already in place. This isn’t rocket science – or it shouldn’t be.
There’s no enforcement mechanism. Compliance is entirely voluntary.
Nothing about why the CEA opposes the legislation.
http://www.ednewscolorado.org/…
And what if the schoolteacher is arrested and not charged, or tried and acquited?
And teachers aren’t the only ones opposed:
But once this rule goes into effect, schools that fail to comply will be in deep doo-doo, right? Well, no:
.
So this poorly drafted set of rules appears to conflict with existing law, exceed the authority of the BOE, is opposed by administrators and teachers alike, and has absolutely no teeth.
Just what we need – more POS rules on the books.
The actual resolution was:
“Condemned” is spin, not fact.
But why the concerns about TFA? I suggest you read the research–all of it, not just from TFA, their big money bank rollers, and politician supporters (both Rs and Ds). Here is a start to see why NEA has legitimate concerns:
http://voices.washingtonpost.c…
This link can lead you to independent research.
You have the right to know that the administration is protecting all children, all the time. Notifying parents of arrests is not the same as protecting children. Notifying parents will ALWAYS destroy a teacher’s reputation.
Preserving the right to the presumption of innocence is always difficult. Balancing that against the need to protect children is perhaps the most difficult task a school district can have. I would support administrative leave without notification. Notification is the easy way out. Your reaction is precisely why it is the wrong way.
I speak as a parent who paid to have my kids educated by a pedophile priest and was NEVER notified. I should have been told because there was no question of the accuracy of the charges. But the horror of that does not justify destroying all teachers on suspicion.
I had no idea the thread was this long and my response to him is separated by a hell of a lot of excellent commentary.