I recall Arleigh speaking out against the hiring of a district energy manager. Perhaps Arleigh can weigh in with his thoughts as to whether this was, in retrospect, a good idea.

While I am in favor of trying to conserve energy, it seems that this could be done for a cost substantially less than $343,200 each year. I know that if the district is saving roughly $1,000,000 on costs, the net gain is about $650,000, but it just seems like this could be done at the individual school sites. For example (as mentioned in the article), the principals could ask that the lights and AC/Heat only be on if people are actually in the room. Computers could be shut down at night to reduce their cost. It just seems like the items mentioned in the article are not special circumstances that warrant a $343,200 a year program.

I’m willing to bet that there has been some creative accounting going on. If the district has been paying $5M in the past, show us some bills that equate to $4M annual expense.

Further, I believe that the “energy czar” was supposed to be someone from the consulting company and that that person’s salary was supposed to come from the energy savings. Thompson is a former principal. What are his credentials for the position of energy czar? The school board needs to stand up and present the facts on this person’s selection.

For $28K per month, what specifically is the district getting. That’s the equivalent of about a head and a half per month of labor. I’d do the job for $20,000 per month!

Bubba. Get some guts and use your real name like everyone else on this blog. What I said at the time was that I had some reservations about the program. In Moorpark and Las Virgenes they had many problems with this program the first year. In Moorpark the Energy Czar was interrupting classrooms in sessions and asking teachers if a computer needed to be on. Or he would shut off computers without the work on it being saved.. In Las Virgenes they came in during the summer, removed all electronic devices and threw them in a big pile. In Simi they did learn from those mistakes and it has gone much more smoothly here. Dr. Thompson was hired because the company recommended hiring a certificated person who would understand the needs of the classroom. Then the company trained him. The company guaranteed that no funds would come from the general fund to pay for the program and that it would save money. Both have been true. The District did try a voluntary program Alan, with limited success. Many of the things Dr. Thompson does are not during the school day.

Oh. Thank you for clarifying that Mr. Kidd.

And thank you Mr. Kidd for acting like a total jerk in your response. That clarifies a lot as well.

Bubba,
Yes it clarifies that you are too gutless to post your name like everyone else. Are you afraid to have your ideas attached to your name? When the Founding Fathers signed the Constitution should they have used fake names?

Get real, this is a blog, not the U.S. Constitution. An "educator" such as yourself should be able to understand the difference. No wonder our schools are in the shape they are in. Besides, I also noticed that you don't raise this issue to your pals in other threads who also don't bother to use real names. A double-standard perhaps? I guess that would be consistent with your character.

Then again, perhaps you do raise a valid point... how exactly would people with imaginative one-word names like Madonna, Cher, or Bono sign the U.S. Constitution? If a single word name is good enough for them it should be good enough for anybody.

Bubba,
My character is to use my real name and to not be a nameless, gutless, coward like yourself. If you want to hide behind a phony name it speaks volumes about your lack of character and confidence.

Arleigh,

Why is it ok for other blogs you frequent to have all sorts of fake names and you debate them al day long, but here, Bubba seems to be your enemy?

Take it down a notch.

Tim

Sticks and Stones Arleigh. Perhaps when you hold everybody to the same standard then others can take you seriously. You might not like what I have to say but I will not be silenced by your bully tactics and cheap name-calling.

Tim,

While I do not want to speak for Arleigh, I would be very upset if someone started posting what they thought I had said. If you look at the first post, Bubba tried to contort what Arleigh said, and then challenged Arleigh. I don't blame him for being a little upset, fake name or not.

Alan,

Read the first post on this thread. I simply asked if Arleigh would weigh in with his thoughts on the hiring of the district energy manager. It was a straight-forward question, yet he chose to respond by attacking me. If Arleigh had simply responded to the question without the attacks then this thread would be a lot more civil. I also don't see why he chooses to make a big issue about me not using my full name when he that is commonly the case on these blogs. If he thinks that anyone who doesn't use their full name is a "nameless, gutless, coward" then I'd like to see him making those same accusations against his buddies who do the exact same thing. I'm not going to be intimidated by guy who acts like a school yard bully.

Tell you what Arleigh, let's start over here. It seems, for some reason, that we have gotten off on the wrong foot. I'm willing to set aside the bad blood and try to get along in a civil manner. I'll leave it up to you whether you are willing to do the same. Your move...

If you look at the blog from the top you will see that I said everyone on this blog uses their real names and that takes guts. Bubba then responded that I was a "jerk". Tim I don't debate anyone on other blogs that do not use their real names. I do post opinions and answer questions when people use their real name. Please refer exactly to the blog where I posted all day long. For all we know Bubba is Tim. I notice Tim blogs very very little on his own blog these days. In terms of the original topic I answered it Bubba and you never responded to the topic, your response was to attack me, easy to do when you don't post your name.

Bubba,

Actually, I have been meaning to ask you. Do I know you? Have we met? Sorry if I am just throwing you a softball.

Tim

Tim,

I don't know you personally, but we did meet briefly after the debates when you were running for school board.

To Arleigh - no, I am not Tim. If I were then I guess I'd be speaking to myself, which would be kind of silly I think. In the dennert blog I'm normally accustomed to being accused of being Judy or one of her staffers, which is also not true. I'm just a concerned citizen with no affiliation to any political campaign or organized group. You can choose to believe that or not I suppose.

So Arliegh, if you don't want to debate me that is fine. It is certainly your perogative to ignore the posts of people who do not use their full name. I would only ask that you also respect my decision to remain anonymous. So if you ignore me I'll be happy to ignore you. Then we can both express our own views in these blogs without the need to directly respond to one another. Works for me.

Go Bubba! Err, I mean, Tim! Or maybe you're really Newt Gingrich!?
Poor Arleigh! As usual the bully can't take it.

Chris,

I am shocked that you think I would have picked an alter-ego moniker that was so - uh - Clinton-like.

Bubba - sheesh.

Though...Bubba does have it all going on. If Bubba were my ghost writer, props to him.

But I am for sure, no bubba.

T