With the recent hub-bub over Supt. Tata calling out School Board members Susan Evans and Christine Kushner about their continued involvement in GSIW, I have to ask....
What's with all the lying?
It actually started before the new Board members were even elected.
During her campaign, Susan Evans claimed to be a CPA. She put it all over her website and her media questionnaires -- even articles in the N&O and Indy Weekly referred to her as a CPA. But, she's not.
And her response when she was caught in this lie was simply: "This is a non issue."
During his campaign, Jim Martin attempted to paint Supt. Tata in a bad light by publishing some of the emails in a chain - but not all of them. Martin was caught in this manipulation yet never apologized or even acknowledged that he purposefully tried to pull a fast one.
A couple of posts ago I exposed an email from Martin titled "Confidential Draft". In this email, he encourages Evans and Kushner to keep the discussion and information about halting the student assignment plan just between the three of them. Yet, when confronted by the N&O about these secret deliberations, Martin tries to twist his way out of it and said:
"I challenge the assertion that somehow it was secret. By that definition, any message sent between two or three board
members would be secret. That's baloney."
Uh, wrong. The fact that the email is between two or three Board members is not contentious nor does it make it secret. But certainly an email that is titled "Confidential" which leaves a breadcrumb trail of deceit, private deliberations and continued secrecy would qualify. Exactly like the one you sent, Mr. Martin.
Why didn't Martin just own up to what he attempted to do? Why is his first reaction to lie about it?
And Evans isn't done telling porkies either.
At the February 7th Board meeting, Evans voted in favor of a 9th grade center for Panther Creek. Just over 24 hours later, she was telling parents and the media that she did no such thing. Evans even tells School Board member Deborah Prickett in an email that she "...voted against it" and that the vote was "...either 6 to 3 or 7 to 2." In reality, the vote was 8-1 with Martin, for whatever reason, voting against it.
Evans could have easily explained her vote to her constituents and her reasoning for her initial support of this facility. But, nooooo. Instead, her first reaction is to lie.
And, now, suddenly, we're just supposed to just believe Evans when she says she no longer has an active role in GSIW? Ms. Pants-on-fire?
Supt. Tata had every right to question Evans' and Kushner's affiliation with GSIW. Both of these women happily accepted an award on behalf of GSIW just last month. You don't send just any ol' person to accept an award for your group. You send your leaders.
So pardon me if I don't believe the "Just take our word for it" approach about their involvement in GSIW. Actions speak much louder than words -- especially when there's an award involved.
Kushner doesn't seem to have a track record of fabrication....yet. (In my opinion, she seems like a fairly reasonable person.) But Evans and Martin have been caught in fairly significant lies in the past.
And, as they say, past behavior predicts future behavior.
Kushner doesn't seem to have a track record of fabrication....yet. (In my opinion, she seems like a fairly reasonable person.) But Evans and Martin have been caught in fairly significant lies in the past.
And, as they say, past behavior predicts future behavior.