On the school-front: Principal Mary Lauer

Principal Mary Lauer talks with a student in her office. Lauer graduated from Colorado public schools. She has spent 30 years working as a teacher and administrator in the state.

Photo courtesy of Greeley Tribune

For Mary Lauer, the conversation about educational reform won't stop November 3rd. It isn't part of any stump speech she gives and it isn't something that can be summarized in a paragraph on her website. Lauer toils for educational reform year-round; it's her job.

"Colorado kids can't wait," said Lauer. "Big changes are coming and if we don't take a look at achievement, if we don't take a look at our teachers, they'll happen to us, not with us."

As principal of Bear Creek High School in Lakewood, Lauer oversees more than 1,400 students and 100 teachers. Her principle duty - making sure all of them get better.

On Friday, Bear Creek students took a day off so Bear Creek teachers could get at the crux of the issue of student achievement gaps. Data from the Colorado Department of Education shows that poor students, minority students, students with disabilities, English language learners, and students who show a history of "needing to catch up" have not made "adequate growth" from 2009 to 2010 at Bear Creek.

Aside from spending 15 hours with her teachers this semester, looking at hard numbers and finding solutions for niche students' lack of proficiency, Lauer also requested that her staff go to the movies. Davis Guggenheim's documentary, "Waiting for Superman," will change the attitude about education reform in America, says Lauer. "Everybody needs to see this film. It's just that good."

A key component of the film rests on legislative interaction with teachers' unions, such as the American Federation of Teachers. When it comes to changing teachers' salaries or reevaluating teachers in the classroom, Guggenheim suggests that the union presents a difficult challenge for reformers. Lauer agrees. "Teachers should lose their non-probationary status if students are not growing," she said. "The union puts tenured teachers in holding tanks where they can't be fired, but are detrimental to have in classrooms. We have to be able to fire bad teachers."

The film spotlighted the result of this head butting in the New York public school system where teachers who have been deemed poor at their craft and those accused of sexual assault can't, by contract, be fired. These limbo teachers spend years in "the rubber room," a space with tables and chairs, magazines and playing cards, awaiting their disciplinary hearings. All while they make full salary.

"I got into this job for the kids," said Lauer. "Now I spend most of my time managing adults."

Colorado is leading the way in negotiations with the teachers' union and reassessing how teachers are paid. The goal is to compensate instructors based on performance in the classroom, not solely on years of experience. The state's efforts have not gone unnoticed. Lauer was at the premiere of "Waiting for Superman" where Guggenheim commended Colorado for taking on the tough changes, she said.

Another form of impending change could look like funding cuts as laid out in Amendments 60, 61 and Proposition 101 on the ballot this November. The initiatives would cease grant funding, as well as cut property tax dollars that have traditionally gone to public schools.

"It's like we (public schools) took out a 30-year loan. Then the bank forces you to pay it back in 10," said Lauer of the potential new laws.

Event Cover: Water 2 Wine

On October 15th, 2010 the Denver Dumb Friends League (DDFL) hosted an event at Water 2 Wine to raise money for the shelter. To attend the event, a $20 fee at the door was required. Oddly enough, only 10% of the wine proceeds went to benefit the shelter.

Brittany Fitzgerald, a participant in the event said that, "I am glad that they are doing an event for the animals, but I feel like they could donate more than 10% of the total proceeds."

However, when speaking with the Denver Dumb Friends league, 10% of the proceeds are typical because the event involved Water 2 Wine as well. Obviously, since Water 2 Wine hosted the event and they provided the wine, they had to receive most of the proceeds. This was also a smaller event; therefore, if the event continues to grow then the donation percentage will also grow as well.

This was a first time event for DDFL and Water 2 Wine. In fact, Lori, one of the owners of Water 2 Wine, has been a huge animal advocate and great supporter of the shelter for 15 years. She said that her family has always had dogs, instead of children, so she thought this would be a good opportunity to raise money.

One of the coordinator’s for DDFL was also there. She also said that Lori had a natural relationship with DDFL and they wanted to try the event. The event was initially created not out of profit, but in support for animal adoption. Although they did not have any animals there, the event tried to center around voicing animal adoption through the shelter.

Typically, DDFL takes in about 26,000 pets and adopts out 15,000 to new homes. The coordinator, Katie Shipley, said that the remaining, often get transferred because of behavioral issues; however, there are those that must be euthanized.

One of Denver Dumb Friends League's larger event is called the "Furry Scurry." Since DDFL is a non-profit organization, they earn a great deal of their revenue from this event. In fact, throughout the year, DDFL houses 25,000 pets. For instance, this year alone the Furry Scurry raised $1,006,475.12 to help homeless pets. Events such as the Furry Scurry and Water 2 Wine make it possible to shelter all of these animals.

The event seemed to be fairly successful. In fact, just off the raffle $200 was raised. The atmosphere seemed to be friendly and the coordinators of the events walked around and checked on all the guests. The guests mainly consisted of middle to upper-class, and by the end of the night, the noise level seemed to increase significantly with the more wine consumed.

Though there were no actual animals at the event and only 10% of the proceeds went to the animals, it seemed like a heart-felt event in support of animal advocacy.

Event Cover 2 - Citizens United panel discussion

If states could compete in a World Series of most corporate cash in campaigns, Colorado would be a strong contender for the national title.

A four-person panel went to bat for purging corporate contributions from campaigns at a discussion Wednesday at the University of Denver. The panel, hosted by the Sturm College of Law, drew about 50 law students and members of the legal community.

The discussion focused on corporate money in Colorado’s fall elections and the implications of the Citizens United v. FEC Supreme Court decision in January, which gave First Amendment free-speech rights to corporations.

“Colorado is ground zero,” said Marge Baker, panelist and executive vice president for policy and program of People for the American Way Foundation.

Baker was referring to the amount of corporate cash spent on Michael Bennet and Ken Buck in the Colorado Senate race compared to other races around the country. According to a Wesleyan Media Project study, this race was sixth in the country for most money spent on advertising.

Also on the panel were Terrence Carroll, Speaker of the Colorado House, John Bonifaz, director of Free Speech for People and Roxana Orrell, member of the National Lawyers Guild Executive Council and of the Move to Amend steering committee.

In the Citizens United decision, a 5-4 Supreme Court majority struck down a provision of the McCain-Feingold Act, and overturned precedent, to allow corporations to fund television broadcasting in elections. Corporations can now independently fund political advertisements in support of or against a candidate, though the Supreme Court did uphold that they must disclose the source of the broadcast and provide a disclaimer about their involvement with the candidate.

The Supreme Court majority based its decision on the premise that the free speech right guaranteed by the First Amendment extends to corporations as well as private citizens.

Baker considered this a faulty reading of the Constitution.

“It was a flawed interpretation of the First Amendment by the Supreme Court,” she said.

The decision represented an erosion of First Amendment power and a misuse of its protections, said Bonifaz.

“We’ve enabled it [the First Amendment] to protect corporations,” he said.

A theme that continued throughout most of the panel discussion was the need for a national constitutional amendment to undo the Citizens United decision.

“You need to amend the constitution to undo the harm,” said Baker.

Though an amendment would certainly be challenging, it has been done 27 times before (after the Bill of Rights), and would not be impossible, said Bonifaz.

“We can do it again, and we must do it again,” he said.

Carroll, Speaker of the Colorado House and adjunct professor at the Sturm College of Law, spoke on use of “hard” and “soft” money in Colorado state elections.

Hard contributions are those donated directly from individuals to candidates, of which there is a limit per donor per candidate. Soft contributions are those donated to 527 organizations, tax-exempt groups that do not have reporting requirements like PACs, which support certain candidates.

These 527 groups are used on a regular basis in Colorado, said Carroll. He recognized that these groups sometimes toe the edge between what he considers acceptable and unacceptable in campaign finance ethics.

“What 527s do comes right up to the line,” he said. “In some cases it does cross the line.”

President Obama came out strongly against the Citizens United decision after it was handed down, declaring that it was a devastating blow to the public interest.

“The last thing we need to do is hand more influence to the lobbyists in Washington, or more power to the special interests to tip the outcome of elections,” he said in a January speech.

The effect would be a resounding flood of special interests power, drowning out individual voices, he said.

“We don't need to give any more voice to the powerful interests that already drown out the voices of everyday Americans,” said Obama.

Event Cover 2: Babah Fly, Music Talks

Babah Fly is a name
you have probably heard if you are in the know in the hip hop music scene of Denver, or are a consistent follower of the magazine, Westword. Fly has been in the music business in Denver for fifteen years so it is safe to say that he is a great person to talk to about how artists get themselves involved in the local music scene.

Babah Fly, born as Matthew Kelley, was hanging out in the basement/lounge underneath the Gypsy House Cafe, or "the Gypsy," located near downtown Denver on 13th and Marion.

As I walked in on Friday night the smell of hookah, coffee, and pastries entered my nose, encouraging me to just sit down and relax rather then finding a musician to talk too, but it had to be done.

I first introduced myself to a frazzled woman behind the counter with brown curly hair named Dena, who I later found out was the owner of the Gypsy. When I asked her who I could talk to about local musicians she led me straight downstairs to Fly.

Fly is smaller guy with huge brown eyes, a beenie on his head, and a calm, relaxed swagger. When I first approached fly he nodded and shook my head offering me a seat on an extra stool behind him. I dove into explaining what I was interested in learning about; how local musicians start playing gigs, who they want to be noticed by, and how they end up making money off of their music. Fly obliged my curiousity.

Fly had a lot to say, "I've been on the music scene for fifteen years, and I starting out playing gigs at coffee shops. I started out at the Mercury Cafe, where they did hip-up shows, and so did a lot of other old-school hip-hip artists. There are a lot of places to start."

Fly made it clear that each genre of music has their own scene. So if your into Reggae you find out where all the Reggae artists are playing. If you are into Rock you find out where the rockers are playing, and so on. Each type of music has their own version of the bottom and the top.

As far as getting noticed, Fly works with the college circuit, and has a booking agency in the South who sets up gigs. As far as monetary success, Fly is not focused on the big bucks, " In the music world today there are a lot more mid-level income people that are playing. As far as it goes, my aim is just to be successful. I'll take what I can get you know, the $100,000 thousand a year vs. the millions, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't take the million (laughs)."

"I've been doing this for awhile so, I do it for the pureness of the music."

Fly is not at all opposed to making money off music, but its not the goal; " Definitely go for money, everyone needs to feed themselves, but from a business perspective, if anyone's soul interest is just to make money then open up a marijuana dispensary, because music takes soul, so if you don't have that I don't think you can produce music that anyone would care to listen to, much less buy."

Fly also mentioned that because of technology and the power of the web, artists, like Fly, send their music over the web which makes it easier to make income. Fly explained, "It used to be that the marketing tool was the flyers people handed out and the product was the music, now the music is the product and the live shows add to the value. It is a different approach."

But before artists can even think about money, they need to think about where they can start and that usually tends to be in coffee shops, or any small clubs that do open-mics, which can include art galleries.

When asked what he would say to other local musicians just starting out he had wise words, " I would say try to think about who is going to listen to you, try to find out where they hang out, go there, and try and play. Love the music, and always think about being creative."

Fly was very helpful in revealing many important aspects of the music scene in Denver. It is clearly a tough venture though and without some creativity, love, and soul, a musician can't take flight.

To hear some of Babah Fly's music go to the following links: http://www.myspace.com/babahfly
http://www.myspace.com/denveravengerz

Photos courtesy of Google Images

Interview: Seven Hills Vet

In Aurora, Colorado a ban is placed on Pit Bulls. Visiting Seven Hills Veterinary Clinic relays the fact that although veterinarians are required to follow certain regulations pertaining to laws such as this, it does not mean they have to agree with them. Veterinarian, Dr. Francis and Kennel Manager, Barbara Duggan, help illustrate this point.

In regards to animal rights, Dr. Francis feels that, “animals have the rights for husbandry, food, shelter, free of pain and discomfort, and to be treated humanely.”

Some of the issues that Dr. Francis feels strongly about pertaining to animal rights is animal cruelty. She feels strongly against all types of cruelty including fur trade or dog fighting; however, she specifically feels strongest against ear cropping. Some owners feel it is necessary to crop the ears of their dog because of appearance purposes.

Next, the main issue addressed was the ban placed on Pit Bulls. In the state of Colorado, in Denver, Aurora, and other metropolitan areas, it is illegal to own a Pit Bull. This has been a huge controversy because many people feel that it is not right to single out a particular breed. Dr. Francis is one of those people. She feels that it is not right to generalize a particular breed on their behavior because dogs differ from one another.

Kennel Manager, Barbara Duggan says that, “The ban is simply unfair because it is not right to generalize one breed. The breeding and owners make a dog what it is. Any breed has the potential aggression that are stereotyped towards Pit Bulls.”

In fact, Duggan stated that most of the dogs that are injured and brought to the clinic due to dog fights are not Pit Bulls.

“Animal advocacy is the best possible solution for animal cruelty. Since animals cannot speak, it is up to people to be their voice,” says Dr. Francis.

If a veterinarian encounters intentional animal cruelty within their profession, they are required by law to report it to the authorities. If they choose not to, they can be help liable for the animal cruelty case. However, there are times where the veterinarian will encounter certain cases of animal cruelty that are unintentional. Dr. Francis said that in this situation, her goal is to educate the owners on the proper welfare of the animal.

Duggan said that when she encounters intentional animal cruelty she confronts the owners and reports the authorities as well. She also feels that educating the owners when unintentional cruelty exists is the best possible solution.

There are animal rights advocates everywhere. Obviously, upon visiting a veterinarian clinic, the environment will be filled with strong opinions dealing with controversial animal rights topics, like the Pit Pull ban and animal cruelty. However, each person differs on his or her opinions. There are those who are not effected by the ban and feel neither one way nor another. There are people who have been effected by the ban and feel that either it should be enforced or it is completely unfair. Seven Hills Veterinarian Clinic is in Aurora (one of the cities with the ban enforced) and surprisingly there are a fair amount of people who feel that it is a unnecessary ban.

Blogger fires debate over Islam, planned Park51 site

Pamela Geller’s spitfire blog has gained national attention in recent months after the announcement of the planned Muslim community center, Park51, just blocks from the Ground Zero site.

Because of her strong opposition, Geller’s blog, Atlas Shrugs, which she started in 2005, has been branded as a hate site. Geller is a single mother of four, and a cosmopolitan from the East Side of Manhattan. She humorously refers to herself as “a racist-Islamophobic –anti-Muslim-bigot.”

“This is Islamic domination and expansionism,” Geller said.

In her blog, Geller has branded the planned site “the ground zero mega-mosque,” the “9/11 monster mosque” and the Islamic “victory lap” of “totalitarian Khomeinism.” As for the developer, she considers them a “thug” and “lowlife” who is “building on a Christian cemetery.”

“I have an interesting play on words sometimes,” she said. “If people like it, I think that’s great.”

Her opposition toward the Muslim community center may have stemmed from her beliefs in American power that she said were pervasive in earlier years. Geller, 52, connects her recent concerns regarding political correctness, media cowardice, changing national identity and individual rights to that belief.

“Growing up as the sort of tail end of the baby boomers, there was this feeling of invincibility in America,” Geller said. “We were free. The good guys won. The good cop is on the beat. I certainly don’t age a sense of that anymore.”

Geller’s interest in Islam began shortly after 9/11, when she had barely heard of Osama bin Laden. She spent one year educating herself on Islam. Geller said she “felt guilty that I didn’t know who had attacked my country.”

Prior to the controversies of Park51, Geller blogged about other hot-button issues such as the Muslim riots over cartoons of the Prophet Muhammed printed in a Danish newspaper.

When the New York Times first reported the plans to build the site two blocks from Ground Zero, Geller was quick to object, writing, “I don’t know which is more grotesque – jihad or the NY Times preening of it.”

She dropped the topic on her blog until May 5 when the project won unanimous approval from a committee of Community Board 1.

The center, which would include a mosque, sports facility and cultural programs to promote understanding between Muslims and non-Muslims, she said, “Probably wouldn’t last two minutes without being bombed by devout Muslims.”

Drawing national attention, the next week The New York Post began the cause “Mosque Madness at Ground Zero” and Geller was booked on Fox News and radio programs.

Pamela Geller- The racist-Islamophobic-anti-Muslim-bigot

Pamela Geller is making headlines as a blogger on what some are referring to as a “hate mission”. Through her blog “Atlas Shrugs”, Geller, 52, spreads her anti-Islamic opinions and views on eradicating the Muslim religion from America. She has gained a significant following; gaining over a million hits to her blog within a month and some are claiming that she is doing nothing but adding fuel to the monster of religious intolerance. Geller has been blogging adamantly about her opposition to the Islamic faith since 2005 and critics have stated that her website is only spreading the fear and intolerance of the Islamic religion as well as a dehumanization of those practicing the faith. However, Geller sees her blogging on a different scale. Geller attributed her ideas to her early years which were imbued with a sense of American power and rectitude, so pervasive that it need not be articulated. After immersing herself into the world of Islam, Jihad, foreign affairs and geopolitics, Geller now claims that she is educated enough to spread the “truth”. Recently, Geller has been fighting a new project, Park51.

After hearing that the Muslim community was attempting to build their own mosque next to the site of ground zero, Geller expressed her immediate disgust in an interview by denouncing the move as “the ground zero mega-mosque” and soon after, posted a blog inviting readers to protest what she termed as the “9/11 monster mosque being built on hallowed ground zero.” When asked about her opinion on Park51, the plans for constructing an Islamic community center near ground zero, Geller adamantly objected to the idea saying “I don’t know which is more grotesque, jihad or the NY Times preening of it”. Even with her objections to Park51 and other issues concerning the Islamic traditions.
Even though Park51 was met with immense approval, Geller is still referring to the project as a “monster mosque” and reiterating her rhetoric by referring to the mosque as “sort of like a victory lap” that was “a stab in the eye of America.” Her outrage was apparent and regardless of Geller’s retaliation towards the committee by posting their contact information and leading rallies that protested against the passing of the plans, she still claimed that it was an insult to the American people for anyone to suggest that herself as well as her allies had laid the groundwork for the anger over the project. However, for the apparent intolerance to the Islamic faith expressed vehemently throughout Atlas Shrugs, however indirectly her anger may have been expressed; it still may have provided the frame for the retaliation. “This is Islamic domination and expansionism” announced Ms. Geller. Her idea for an appropriate center would be one that is only devoted to “incitement to violence” followed by the expunging of the Koran.