Mackey, Hansen Advance To November Runoff For County Superintendent Of Schools

June 5, 2018 23:55 pm · 31 comments

Lynn Mackey and Cheryl Hansen will be battling for the job of County Superintendent of Schools in the November election.

With 95-percent of precincts reporting, it appears Mackey failed to get 50-percent of the vote, meaning she’ll be in a runoff election with Cheryl Hansen.

As of 11:35 p.m., Concord City Councilman and Clayton Valley Charter High School Assistant Superintendent Ron Leone is in third place.

DrvrdadCA June 6, 2018 at 8:31 AM

Will this be a sign to Leone to find another line of work (besides politics)?

jtkatec June 6, 2018 at 11:17 AM

No, politics is too lucrative for Leone to give up. There’s so many pots he can put his hands into.

Dave Hughes June 6, 2018 at 3:24 PM

I would expect him to run for something else. When is his City Council term up?

Hmm June 6, 2018 at 5:24 PM

CVCHS is looking for a new Executive Director. With Leone’s current position as Assistant Superintendent, he ought to be a shoe in 🤣🤣🤣

Hmm June 7, 2018 at 9:43 AM

Oh wait, didn’t he sign the petition for the Antioch Charter? He should have a job waiting for him there!

mtzman June 8, 2018 at 10:31 AM

And now that the election is over, poof! No more Ron Leone, no more assistant superintendent on the CVCHS website. Whatever will the Ugly Eagles do without him?

DrvrdadCA June 6, 2018 at 8:32 AM

304 write in votes, hmmm

Well Folks June 6, 2018 at 9:14 AM

You do realize that is a small number as this was a county wide decision not just a Concord decision..

CDE Watcher June 6, 2018 at 1:13 PM

Best possible outcome.

Needless to say the best outcome for November is a job share between the two candidates. Best fit for all concerned parties.

WhoDatGurl June 6, 2018 at 3:35 PM

You’ve GOT to be kidding. Hansen is the only one who is qualified for this role. She’s been a teacher, a principal and worked at the County Office of Education for 10 years. In fact, the COE employees endorses Hansen, not Mackey. Mackey was promoted by Sakata into a made up job so Mackey could have a nice title, however, Mackey has no idea how to run or fix the Office of Education. They’ve let charter schools run all over the Office and they have no idea what small districts need or want.

EVERY teacher organization supports Cheryl Hansen, and all but one of the Superintendents in the districts in Co Co county. That’s why Hansen is the best choice for our Office of a Education and our students.

Dave H June 6, 2018 at 3:43 PM

Agreed. Glad to see county voters put a stop to the same money that’s been buying our local government for years. Gives me hope that we can stop them again in November, depending on who they decide to back in the district elections.

Denise Pursche June 7, 2018 at 10:08 AM

Come November MACKEY gets my vote. Lynn Mackey as far as I’m concerned is the one to vote into office. Hansen didn’t do her due diligence when it came to sexuality education for 5th graders that was not reviewed by our board (MDUSD – where she current sits as VP of the Board). She doesn’t get my vote because some how or some way this curriculum was instituted without board review, discussion, or a vote. It was an oversight. Perhaps because the board Pres and VP didn’t want the vote in front of the board due to Hansen’s new election for an office she had not held in the past where her name might not be known….no way I give her my vote. She lost my confidence when the board did nothing after they supposedly found out that the curriculum was already being taught in our schools to 10 and 11 year old children without board oversight and parent input. Incredulous? How did that happen on Hansen’s watch? Isn’t there first job to protect children from inappropriate education curriculum. 11 lessons, 40 minutes each. In the past 2 lessons, just human reproduction. Not age appropriate instruction.

Denise Pursche June 12, 2018 at 2:45 PM

Oh yes, and I forgot to add. Did you know that when/if the number of Clayton designated “home school” is large enough, as in one high school class number (about 40 kids), that the district can take back one of the classrooms from CVCHS. So, in the unlikely event that there are hundreds of Clayton kids who decide to attend NG as their “home school”, the district will step in and take back the classrooms from CVCHS. Did you know that? Hm? And, I add, may be we take them back from CVCHS and designate CVCHS once again part of MDUSD! I wish for that and hope that will come to pass. But, that is just me. Perhaps a view not held by other parents at CVCHS? Well, one can hope I guess.

Then on another note. I understand the Freshman class at NG is bit larger than the last few years (or at least that’s what I’ve been told). However, the reason it is so large isn’t because of any number of Clayton kids going to your school, no it’s because your town has built all kinds of 3 story condos in large, very large complexes on every corner imaginable and are jam packing your school full of new students. That’s the reason for the increase in your numbers. So, let’s make sure that we are truthful about what is really happening in regards to any decision that the MDUSD Board made about a “home school” and it’s effect on your NG school. Look forward to your response NG Parent. Adios for now.

NG Parent June 7, 2018 at 12:10 PM

Hansen’s unethical and self interest Clayton decision shows that she can’t be trusted with authority. Delegate a high school in walnut creek, two towns away for Clayton residents instead one of the closer next town over concord high schools. Clayton(her home town) home values would’ve plummeted. She backdoored everyone on that decision and the community went ballistic so the board had to modify it. You can’t spin it any other way. Disgusting.

Nutcreek Frontier June 8, 2018 at 1:27 PM

Thank you NG parent. Walnut Creek has not forgotten Hansen’s unethical line-jumping of Clayton Valley students over everyone else in the district, and this will be reflected in our vote.

Denise Pursche June 8, 2018 at 2:36 PM

NG Parent and Nutcreek Frontier. Isn’t Clayton just ONE town away and about 10 miles in distance from you school? You and nutcreek are upset about 7 kids (or less) going to NC who live 10 miles or less from your school that would have gone to CVCHS without Hansen’s vote/others on the board voted too. Unanimously, I might add. Though I would be interested to know the number from Clayton who were transferred into your school, if you have any solid numbers for last year. Is there any number that has been confirmed. I know some residence of WC were upset and thought hundreds would attend NC if give the chance, but that didn’t happen. Still would like to have any information you might have on the issues. Thanks.

NG Parent June 11, 2018 at 12:04 PM

One town away? What map are you looking at? Why didnt she attmept to designate concord high schools that are the town right next to clayton? No. Lets jump over concord and designate a school in walnut creek to protect home values. Whatever the numbers are is ancillary. Its her intent. Unless you are a friend or family of Hansen’s; you see where the decsion makes no sense. Stop trying to spin it any other way. Waste of time.

Denise Pursche June 12, 2018 at 2:22 PM

NG parent – pray tell – do tell me how many students you got due to this decision in terms of increase over previous years? I believe it was less than 10 students from Clayton who entered your school gates this last school year after the decision. Oh, and BTW, essentially there was NOT ONE NET GAIN over prior years (in terms of an average). Yes, in fact, the numbers were steady and did not change even after MDUSD voting for ANY SCHOOL in the district a parent could designate it as their “home school”. The numbers for NG were if not exactly the same as previous year, they may have been even less. So, the decision to ALLOW parents from Clayton to designate their “homeschool”, had ZERO EFFECT on your numbers, despite all the fears from NG paretns who stated that hundred would come. They stated that hundreds would come to their gates, as well as in writing that prediction, in numerous forums that hundreds would attend. But, pray tell, nothing became of it. True, I said, that wouldn’t happen (in writing on those same forums) and you want to why I was able to make that prediction? Well, first parents from Clayton aren’t going to go to NG because the traffic is hell/commute is every worse nightmare, so instead the opt for convenience and attend CVCHS, with the exception of less than 10 (I believe split between Pine Hallow and Diablo View Middle). Do tell me if my numbers are incorrect, as I’m always collecting information. PS, I still beg to differ it’s TWO towns away (if you follow my logic) of Ygnacio Valley Rd to Walnut Creek is the path. That’s why I say it’s ONE TOWN AWAY and I still will hold that is true that on one side of the rd, Ygnacio Valley Rd is Walnut Creek and the other side of the Ygnacio Valley Rd is Concord. Perhaps it’s a matter of perspective?

3rdrail9er June 12, 2018 at 4:51 PM

To get to Northgate from Clayton you drive thru Concord( both sides of Ygnacio blvd.) so: two towns

To get to Northgate from Crystyl Ranch, you go from Concord to WC so: one town

We may have seen only ten this year but there could come a time where 20 kids choose NG each year for 3 years in a row bringing 60 new students.
regardless of the actual numbers this year, the intent was clear : protect the property values and brand dissenters as racist

Denise Pursche June 12, 2018 at 9:41 PM

3rdrail9er No one said the word racist? Whose telling stories? I’ve never uttered those words. But, again, IF 60 come through your gates, then MDUSD has the right to take back a classroom from CVCHS. I believe they would do it as they have threatened to do so in the past. By law if they get a class room full of designations to NG from Clayton Valley High School (which is doubtful; again what do you not understand, 99% of all people who are in CVCHS love it there and not only that they don’t want to go to NG (as much as that might be to unbelievable), they don’t want the commute night mare and 60 minutes to your school from their house during 7;30 AM traffic jams. And, I guess, who could blame them. Not many people want to brave those odds for traffic, rather the ease of the commute, perhaps less than 10 minutes to the closest high school CVCHS. As for the “crystal ranch” folks, they are already part of your district, I believe, so perhaps still slicing lemons to say one or two towns away. Does anyone really believe crystal ranch is concord, maybe only in address, plus what are there 100 houses in crystal ranch? Lots of open space between Clayton and Walnut creek too, still making it one town away in many peoples minds and a wonderful down town visit from Clayton folks to WC too, which I’m sure you love their spending at your store fronts in your town, now don’t you? No? Still the number of “home school” is small comparatively speaking perhaps less than 1% of your total population for Clayton folks coming your way to NG? But they score well on testing don’t they ( I know lots who said they were worried about that too). But, I get it, you want your school for your kids and anyone else can go pound sand. Fair enough. But really do you have to tell the remaining MDUSD that they can get more “title one money” and be better for it? That’s was a stretch in your bid to carve out a district, was it not? But racist? Not so sure about that…

Denise Pursche June 7, 2018 at 5:49 PM

From San Diego Unified, to Fremont Unified, and all across our state to many other districts, parents across this state are rejecting the 3Rs curriculum because it is too much too soon. This is the exact same curriculum our district decided to implement without board approval and parent input.

And, of course, we all have petitions. Fremont has 6000 signers. San Diego Unified has over 4000.

MDUSD parents are no different demanding accountability from our board and superintendent to explain why this curriculum was implemented without parent review, without board oversight and without a discussion and vote from our board.

Cheryl Hansen is VP of the Board and running for another board position. She and our other board members need to be held accountable for their lack of oversight. After all as the presenters on parent night kept calling our kids “children”, who are 10 and 11 years old, they are children and we as their parents and their district board and superintendent are responsible for protecting them.

That’s our boards job!

Here’s a link to our petition. All of the lesson plans are linked at the bottom of the petition. Please share and sign. And, of course Vote Mackey in November.

Publius June 7, 2018 at 8:25 PM

Every parent can use the opt out provision on any of these programs. Always has been, always will be. I don’t want someone deciding for me what my child has the opportunity to be involved in, so, Mrs. Pursche I will decide what my child participates in, not you If you dont ‘t want your child involved then opt out,put him/her in private school, or be home schooled. But, for me personally I don’t want your bigotry influencing my child’s education

Secondly. I don’t ever recall seeing your name on a ballot for a board position. Quit whining and get involved

Thirdly, you seem to target one individual when the board consists of five people who vote on issues. Perhaps you need a workshop on the role and responsibilities of board members because you obviously are clueless.

Last, I doubt if you even know what Mackey stands for, if she stands for anything.Your animosity towards Hansen seems to be more centered around personal envy rather than substance or policy. Not a convincing position.

Denise Pursche June 8, 2018 at 9:37 AM

At least I don’t hide behind a name that doesn’t identify me publicly “publius”. And, at least I’ve reviewed the curriculum to know what’s in it and what’s not in it. I am not targeting anyone, but here’s what I say, and my opinion is that she is running for an office she has not held prior, if anyone of the other board members were running for another office, I would be calling them on the carpet as I have done, BTW, plenty of times over the last 3 months to our board in public comments to our board. Our district superintendent and our board didn’t do their due diligence. They never reviewed this curriculum. They never discussed it as a board. They never saw it prior to implementation. They never sought out parent input. And, they never voted on it either. Not one person on this board gets my vote until and unless they right this wrong in any future election. There must be full disclosure of their failings. As one board member said at the last board meeting, “I apologize that this curriculum was implemented without board oversight. That should never happen ever again in the future.” I agree, it should have never happened and it should never happen ever again in the future. However, our board and superintendent have still FAILED to take this up in a vote by this board, perhaps maybe, after the election in November would be more advantageous to those running for another position. I only vote for the brave and the forthright. As an aside Fremont, San Diego, Ocean City, Sacramento Unified, among others (in our state) and this curriculum from 3Rs has parents who are rejecting this curriculum. We as parents will not stop. As many teachers told parents, your kids are going to hear it anyway on the play ground, so why would you opt them out. Opt out isn’t a solution to inappropriate sexuality education for 10 and 11 year old children.

Follow the money June 7, 2018 at 8:37 PM

You should check out the campaign finance filings. Ron Leone’s campaign expenditures for this calendar year were just over $150,000!!!! And $65,000 of those contributions came from the Charter Public Schools PAC, which is the CA Charter Schools Association. That is over double what Lynn Mackey spent, and over triple what Cheryl Hansen spent.

Thank you Contra Costa voters for realizing who were the best candidates.

mtzman June 12, 2018 at 10:26 PM

Following the money is a great idea, and while looking at Leone be sure to also take a look at Hansen and Mackey. A couple of posters have claimed that the county office employees all support Hansen, but when you look at her financial disclosure forms, you sure don’t see many CCCOE employees donating. The same is true for MDUSD, where the majority of MDUSD donators are teachers formerly associated with CVCHS. By contrast, there are tons of CCCOE employees at all levels, from Karen Sakata on down. Having worked with Hansen and Mackey, it seems the smart money is on Mackey.

Jojo Potato June 7, 2018 at 8:41 PM

Internet petitions are meaningless. Clicking on a link simply shows the person has the intelligence of a pigeon in a Skinner box. And Fremont is not a representative example that we should be following. The population is heavily Indian and Chinese immigrants not at all similar to Claycord. This prudish attitude to sex is not “protecting” the children, they will just find other sources of information. Time for the adults to act like it.

Denise Pursche June 8, 2018 at 9:42 AM

You should check out not only Fremont but Ocean City, Sacramento, San Diego Unified too. Parents from those communities are also rejecting this curriculum from 3Rs/Advocacy for Youth. The laws do not specify that a district has to teach this curriculum to elementary school age children. In fact, the law exempts elementary school age children and allows for district choice. The districts can teach it, but they don’t have to. The 1st of the laws is that the curriculum must be age appropriate. In fact the laws say, “All materials and instruction SHALL be age appropriate”. This is the 1st law written, all the rest of the laws fall below the first of the laws, “it shall be age appropriate”. In the end, the state does not mandate that these 11 topics be taught to elementary school age children TK-6th grade. The law only demands that these 11 lesson be taught ONCE in middle school and ONCE in high school.

Big John June 8, 2018 at 8:14 AM

Follow the Money at cvchs what is an assistent sup at one school

Publius June 8, 2018 at 12:14 PM

If you don’t like the law contact your representative in Sacramento.

Run for office

I do not want YOU telling ME what My child can see or take part in. I’m the parent; You are not

Opt out – That is available to you.

Denise Pursche June 8, 2018 at 12:29 PM

Publius. Opt out – what ever! Do you have a 5th grade child? You can teach them anything you want too! I have 5th grade kids and they were opted out and did not go through the training, but they did hear about on the play ground. BTW they received all of the lessons at home. ALL OF THEM! I taught them! But, I’m asking questions and I will continue to do that publicly without hiding who I am behind some name that doesn’t identify me. I am not afraid. I ask how did this happen, that this curriculum was NOT reviewed by our board and superintendent. Again, NO parent input (though that is customary), no board input either/no discussion prior to implementation, not voted on by our board and superintendent yet implemented without all of that oversight. Odd, I say? How did that happen? One of the jobs of our board and superintendent is to review curriculum, especially curriculum that has a big change over any previous curriculum. That’s their job. The previous curriculum was 2 lessons (40 minutes each; human production). The new curriculum is 11 lessons, 40 minutes each. Our board didn’t review it, didn’t discuss it, didn’t vote on it. They didn’t do their job because someone made the decision for them. It looks like 2 staffers made the decision to not bring this curriculum to the board and I want to know why they were able to do that without any oversight from our board members and from parents. And, now we have one of those board members who is running for another office. I can not in good faith vote for her, though I have in the past. I want answers and actions from this board and until I get them, I will keep speaking out and bringing their lack of oversight in front of the people. Sadly, they have left it as if they are ignoring the problem, hoping that it will go away. I promise I will not stop until this board takes action by voting on the curriculum and all of the rest of the oversight that is required of them by the people of this district.

Denise Pursche June 8, 2018 at 12:34 PM

In addition to that Publius….you should check out not only Fremont but Ocean City, Sacramento, San Diego Unified too. Parents from those communities are also rejecting this curriculum from 3Rs/Advocacy for Youth. Many other districts, other than those I have listed are ALSO rejecting this curriculum from Advocates for Youth/3Rs curriculum too. The laws do not specify that a district has to teach this curriculum to elementary school age children. In fact, the law exempts elementary school age children and allows for district choice. The districts can teach it, but they don’t have to. The 1st of the laws is that the curriculum must be age appropriate. In fact the laws say, “All materials and instruction SHALL be age appropriate”. This is the 1st law written, all the rest of the laws fall below the first of the laws, “it shall be age appropriate”. In the end, the state does not mandate that these 11 topics be taught to elementary school age children TK-6th grade. The law only demands that these 11 lesson be taught ONCE in middle school and ONCE in high school. Our district board and superintendent need to bring this to a discussion and vote on the curriculum. When they do that…I will rest my case. But, until them I will keep up discussion until I see some sense and sensibility from this board and superintendent.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: