Friday, October 24, 2008
https://eservices.nysed.gov/oasfraud/
The title of this post is the address to file complaints with the NYS Education Dept.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Need Verification
I don't know if anyone else heard. I was told two days ago that Mr. Servidone was not renewed as the Football Coach at Columbia without cause. A last ditch effort by a rogue SCHOOL BOARD to get their way. The remaining 5 people that need to be removed from the school board are going to go. We need to change who represents us!
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
THREE DOWN....... FIVE TO GO!
The winds of change are upon us. You saw through all the material and propaganda to vote yes to the Budget. The children of our district are grateful.
The Becky fiasco lives in our budget again this year. We have begun the process of removing a rogue school board. Next year three more will be removed and we won't settle until they are entirely replaced! YES, MS. HART THAT INCLUDES YOU!
The Becky fiasco lives in our budget again this year. We have begun the process of removing a rogue school board. Next year three more will be removed and we won't settle until they are entirely replaced! YES, MS. HART THAT INCLUDES YOU!
Monday, April 28, 2008
Change is upon us...... MAY 12th MEET THE CANDIDATES!
New Faces in the crowd looking to step up. Finally, the time has come to address this inept BOE.
Meet the Candidates night is scheduled for Monday, May 12, 2008 at the Genet Auditorium. The following are the candidates running for the Board of Education:
Michael Angelo
Mark Mann
Michelle LeClair
Betty Young
JoAnn Taylor
James MacArevey
Linda Jones
Ms. Jones, Mr. MacArevey, Mr. Chesser thank you for your service. It is unfortunate that only Mr. Chesser has seen the writing on the wall. Ms. Jones and Mr. MacArevey have not.
PLEASE DON"T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU ON YOUR WAY OUT! WE CAN TURN OUT THE LIGHTS!
Meet the Candidates night is scheduled for Monday, May 12, 2008 at the Genet Auditorium. The following are the candidates running for the Board of Education:
Michael Angelo
Mark Mann
Michelle LeClair
Betty Young
JoAnn Taylor
James MacArevey
Linda Jones
Ms. Jones, Mr. MacArevey, Mr. Chesser thank you for your service. It is unfortunate that only Mr. Chesser has seen the writing on the wall. Ms. Jones and Mr. MacArevey have not.
PLEASE DON"T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU ON YOUR WAY OUT! WE CAN TURN OUT THE LIGHTS!
Sunday, April 13, 2008
VOTE YES ON BUDGET!
VOTE YES on the budget and VOTE OUT THIS BOARD OF EDUCATION. Three at a time, there Time has come!
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
MUST READ.. THANK YOU CHIP
The East Greenbush community is understandably angry with the school board over the questionable decision to hire Dr. Rebecca Furlong as superintendent, only to grant her a paid administrative leave five months later. Taxpayers are certainly within their rights to demand an explanation, but unfortunately, the separation agreement between the Board and Dr. Furlong specifically (and legally) prohibits any public or private comment on the matter by either party.
This lack of forthcoming information has further eroded public trust in the board, and led to speculation, rumor, and sadly, some very nasty verbal exchanges among members of our community. Recognizing that this growing furor is on a collision course with the district budget vote (and because I love this district), I feel I have a responsibility to make an effort to clear up some misconceptions and present some facts, because I can.
It’s my hope that the sooner everyone understands what has happened, the sooner we’ll be able to move forward towards a common goal, whatever that may be.Before I continue, in the interests of full disclosure, I am a district parent, taxpayer, and employee, and speak for no one but myself. (It was brought to my attention last summer that some board members have a problem with my mentioning my employment whenever I write about district-related issues. I’m not sure why this is - I have yet to be contacted directly - but I wouldn’t feel right urging residents to support the budget without telling them that $41,000 of it goes to me.)I was also one of 46 community members privileged to participate in the superintendent hiring process.
Although I was outspoken in my opposition to the board’s decision not to select Cohoes School District superintendent Charles Dedrick, I was 100% publicly and privately supportive of Superintendent Furlong following her appointment. But over the course of the five months following, it became evident to many of us (including, most importantly, the board) that Dr. Furlong was not the right person for the job.So, first of all, in defense of our board:· I have never doubted that any board member wants what most of us want, namely, that which is best for our kids and our district.· Each member puts in an extraordinary amount of time doing an unpaid, often thankless job that carries with it a tremendous amount of responsibility. Regardless of what happens in the upcoming board election in May, all nine members will continue serving through June 30th, with at least six of them for another year beyond that. So if we as a community are serious about wanting what’s best for our kids and our district, it’s imperative that we all work together to reach some consensus.·
For at least ten years (right up until the hiring of Dr. Furlong, in fact), I had generally been quite pleased with the board’s actions and oversight, so much so that I rarely felt the need to attend board meetings.· Given the recent circumstances, the board (or at least a majority of five) absolutely did the right thing in brokering a separation deal with Dr. Furlong. It’s certainly a shame that we ever got to this point and that the separation is so costly. But to their credit, the board recognized that two wrongs (hiring AND keeping her) don’t make a right, and they did what is best for our kids and the district.· The board is bound legally by the separation agreement (more on this later) which specifically states that “Neither the Board, individually or collectively, nor the Superintendent, will express any statements or opinions disparaging the other…Any comments, either publicly or privately, by any members of the Board shall essentially consist of the comments in the Letter of Recommendation which…will be included in the reference portion of the Superintendent’s personnel folder.” (Yes, that’s right – a “Letter of Recommendation.”)
So as much as any board member might like to answer the questions to which many are demanding answers, wisely, none will comment because to do so would open the district up to a lawsuit.So now as word spreads throughout the district (and I’m not convinced it’s really out there yet, which frightens me because I don’t want voters first hearing of all this the week before the budget vote), it’s important that people be able to distinguish between fact, fiction, and opinion. It therefore becomes the responsibility of those of us who choose to pass information along to verify its accuracy before doing so; if we don’t, we are doing our district and its residents a tremendous disservice. And if any of us discovers we have passed incorrect information along, we need to apologize and correct it right away.
This is particularly important when it comes to blogging.I think blogsites are a valuable form of communication. They provide a forum for discussion, which should always be encouraged, and their convenience (as opposed to having to attend a meeting, for example) allows for much greater participation, particularly by those who have thoughts to share but who might not be comfortable speaking in front of a group. And blogging allows for anonymity, which I also believe is a good thing.
A number of board members have publicly stated their disregard for comments or opinions submitted anonymously, which I find unsettling for several reasons:· I know many district parents and employees who are afraid of voicing their opinions because they fear retribution against themselves or their kids, which is both sad and frightening when you really think about it. Without anonymity, they have no voice.· It’s reasonable to assume that most (if not all) of the entries on this blogsite are the opinions of district residents (although just how many residents is impossible to know). Board members might not be pleased with the content or tone of these entries, but since they are the opinions of residents (and probably voters) I would think it wise to treat them as matters of concern.·
There’s generally a clear difference between a rant and a thoughtful opinion. Many of the blog entries, for example, are reasonable and make very good points (a few of the rants do, too), so it’s disappointing that these would be dismissed simply because they are not accompanied by a name. I don’t consider most of the blog opinions any less valid just because I don’t know who submitted them.
I believe the board has unintentionally created an atmosphere of fear and distrust. But I also believe they can remedy this if they so choose, perhaps by publicly encouraging respectful comments and discussion, particularly during this transitional time as we enter budget season. If we can’t have open and honest public dialogue in an educational setting, we’ve got much larger problems than we think.There’s a lot of information circulating throughout the district (including on this site) that just isn’t true. Distorted facts and rumors are mostly to blame. But since much of it sounds believable, people tend to believe it, which is troubling. I don’t want our district being perceived as something it’s not, but more importantly, I don’t want district residents basing their budget votes on information that’s just not true.
Democracy works best when voters are reasonable and informed. Unfortunately, I can’t help much with the reasonable part, except to ask voters to be fair and objective. But I can provide information that is factual, and often verifiable. If every voter is informed and a budget goes down, I can accept that. But to know a budget wasn’t passed because voters based their decisions on something that isn’t true? That will be tough to take.
My goal is to eliminate (or at least lessen) that possibility.It’s wise to treat any source of new information (including blog entries and “Letters to the Editor”) with a certain amount of skepticism. Unless a source is reliable, it’s wise to seek out other sources that might confirm what’s being reported, or seek out the information yourself. In addition to having many conversations with dozens of people over the past eight months, I’ve submitted several Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests to the district in an effort to collect some facts. (PLEASE note that I am NOT encouraging everyone to start FOILing. It’s important to understand that FOIL requests take up the time of Business Office employees, and this being budget season is the busiest time of year for them. I’ll be glad to share information I’ve already collected if it means less work for anybody.)
So based upon what I know to be true, research I’ve done, conversations I’ve had with people I trust, and documents I’ve FOILed, I’m comfortable presenting the following:· I had nothing to do with the creation of this blogsite (I have no idea who did) and this is my first entry. Note that my name is on it, as it will be on any subsequent entries I make.· Although the public vote for Dr. Furlong was 9-0, this was not the case behind the scenes. (I do understand the importance of showing unanimous support publicly.)·
The last five (5) budgets were passed by the following margins:
Year Margin In Favor Against #Votes
2007 334 1626 1292 2918
2006 40 1737 1697 3434
2005 220 1746 1526 3272
2004 46 1699 1653 3352
2003 594 2252 1658 3910·
Of the 46 members of the public forum, 2 recommended Dr. Furlong, 2 recommended Gary Cooper, 40 recommended Mr. Dedrick, 1 was divided between Mr. Cooper and Mr. Dedrick, and 1 felt none of the candidates was acceptable.· Newest board member Karen Curran had nothing to do with the hiring of Dr. Furlong. The remaining 8 members along with retired board president Sue Hains oversaw the entire hiring process.·
The fee paid to the superintendent search consultant firm was $13,700.· The cost for the new furniture for the superintendent’s office was $7,727.99.·
I have not been banned from board meetings.·
The 11-page separation agreement (known officially as the “Amendment to Agreement”) between the district and Dr. Furlong (which refers back to the initial 16-page “Agreement” under which she was hired) is a challenging read, so much so that I consulted a lawyer. I summarize what I feel are the major points, which can be confusing:o
From 12/18/07-6/30/08 Dr. Furlong is still Superintendent of Schools and is paid at the same rate as she would have been had she not been granted a “paid Leave of Absence” ($160,000/year + benefits) UNLESS she gets a job that pays at least $120,000/year, in which case the district will pay her 80% of the salary remaining through 6/30/08.o
Following 6/30/08, the “Leave of Absence” expires, and “the Superintendent shall be deemed to have resigned.”
From 7/1/08-12/31/08 the district will pay her “voluntary, post-employment severance” at the same rate as above - $160,00/year + benefits – UNLESS she gets a job that pays at least $120,00/year, in which case payments will cease.o
If as of 12/31/08 Dr. Furlong has not secured personal health insurance, she can elect to continue her health insurance through COBRA coverage for up to 18 months, and the district will reimburse her for up to six months of payments.
Yeah, it’s a lot of money. But let’s look at it another way: If you examine the worst case (where the district’s obligation extends to 6/30/09), we’re in for roughly $200,000.
Although I was unable to establish the number of district taxpayers, I did find out that there are 13,238 parcels of land, and some taxpayers own more than one parcel. So let’s estimate that there are 10,000 taxpayers, in which case the worst-case separation agreement amounts to $20 per taxpayer. (For 8,000 taxpayers it would be $25 apiece.) I think this is a very good deal, and I’m hoping others will see it this way, too.
The greater challenge will be to convince voters not to vote the budget down because they’re angry with the board. The budget vote and board member votes are distinct. If you’re unhappy with the budget, you vote it down. If you’re unhappy with a board member, you vote for someone else.
Typically a budget is voted down because voters are trying to keep their taxes from rising even more. (Sadly, the only place we can easily affect this is with the school budget vote.) This year, however, there’s an incredible undercurrent of negativity rolling through the district, due almost entirely to the arrival and departure of Dr. Furlong and fueled by rumors and untruths surrounding the past 8½ months.
I’ve attempted to clear up some of the misconceptions with this blog entry, and will continue to do so as they arise, because I want EVERY voter to be informed. Voting is larger responsibility than we often treat it as, so please – take the time to learn the facts, share them with your friends and neighbors, and vote your conscience. I know the board is working hard to craft a reasonable, affordable budget, and I’m confident one will be.Choosing to have our four kids educated in the East Greenbush School District was the best investment my wife and I ever made, and we’ll always be grateful to the taxpayers, teachers, administrators, board members and support staff that were responsible. And even though we’re near the end of this road (one to go – a junior at Columbia), we have no intention of abandoning those still in the pipeline, and we’ll continue to support the district in every way possible.
The value of education cannot be overstated, nor can the value of a good school district to the community.As we brace for the very real possibility of our first rejected budget in many years, it’s important to note that throughout all the turmoil and anxiety that has accompanied this school year, teachers and administrators have been able to separate their concerns from their responsibilities and deliver the same fine quality of education we’ve come to expect, all the while insulating our kids from the distractions that plagued many of us. (See the district website home page at www.egcsd.org for some examples of this year’s many accomplishments.) There are two reasons for this recurring success: These people are very good at what they do, and they have the support of a community that recognizes the importance of what they do and the passion and conviction with which they do it. I’m certain they will continue to honor their end of this relationship if we uphold ours.
Sincerely,
Chip Balzer
This lack of forthcoming information has further eroded public trust in the board, and led to speculation, rumor, and sadly, some very nasty verbal exchanges among members of our community. Recognizing that this growing furor is on a collision course with the district budget vote (and because I love this district), I feel I have a responsibility to make an effort to clear up some misconceptions and present some facts, because I can.
It’s my hope that the sooner everyone understands what has happened, the sooner we’ll be able to move forward towards a common goal, whatever that may be.Before I continue, in the interests of full disclosure, I am a district parent, taxpayer, and employee, and speak for no one but myself. (It was brought to my attention last summer that some board members have a problem with my mentioning my employment whenever I write about district-related issues. I’m not sure why this is - I have yet to be contacted directly - but I wouldn’t feel right urging residents to support the budget without telling them that $41,000 of it goes to me.)I was also one of 46 community members privileged to participate in the superintendent hiring process.
Although I was outspoken in my opposition to the board’s decision not to select Cohoes School District superintendent Charles Dedrick, I was 100% publicly and privately supportive of Superintendent Furlong following her appointment. But over the course of the five months following, it became evident to many of us (including, most importantly, the board) that Dr. Furlong was not the right person for the job.So, first of all, in defense of our board:· I have never doubted that any board member wants what most of us want, namely, that which is best for our kids and our district.· Each member puts in an extraordinary amount of time doing an unpaid, often thankless job that carries with it a tremendous amount of responsibility. Regardless of what happens in the upcoming board election in May, all nine members will continue serving through June 30th, with at least six of them for another year beyond that. So if we as a community are serious about wanting what’s best for our kids and our district, it’s imperative that we all work together to reach some consensus.·
For at least ten years (right up until the hiring of Dr. Furlong, in fact), I had generally been quite pleased with the board’s actions and oversight, so much so that I rarely felt the need to attend board meetings.· Given the recent circumstances, the board (or at least a majority of five) absolutely did the right thing in brokering a separation deal with Dr. Furlong. It’s certainly a shame that we ever got to this point and that the separation is so costly. But to their credit, the board recognized that two wrongs (hiring AND keeping her) don’t make a right, and they did what is best for our kids and the district.· The board is bound legally by the separation agreement (more on this later) which specifically states that “Neither the Board, individually or collectively, nor the Superintendent, will express any statements or opinions disparaging the other…Any comments, either publicly or privately, by any members of the Board shall essentially consist of the comments in the Letter of Recommendation which…will be included in the reference portion of the Superintendent’s personnel folder.” (Yes, that’s right – a “Letter of Recommendation.”)
So as much as any board member might like to answer the questions to which many are demanding answers, wisely, none will comment because to do so would open the district up to a lawsuit.So now as word spreads throughout the district (and I’m not convinced it’s really out there yet, which frightens me because I don’t want voters first hearing of all this the week before the budget vote), it’s important that people be able to distinguish between fact, fiction, and opinion. It therefore becomes the responsibility of those of us who choose to pass information along to verify its accuracy before doing so; if we don’t, we are doing our district and its residents a tremendous disservice. And if any of us discovers we have passed incorrect information along, we need to apologize and correct it right away.
This is particularly important when it comes to blogging.I think blogsites are a valuable form of communication. They provide a forum for discussion, which should always be encouraged, and their convenience (as opposed to having to attend a meeting, for example) allows for much greater participation, particularly by those who have thoughts to share but who might not be comfortable speaking in front of a group. And blogging allows for anonymity, which I also believe is a good thing.
A number of board members have publicly stated their disregard for comments or opinions submitted anonymously, which I find unsettling for several reasons:· I know many district parents and employees who are afraid of voicing their opinions because they fear retribution against themselves or their kids, which is both sad and frightening when you really think about it. Without anonymity, they have no voice.· It’s reasonable to assume that most (if not all) of the entries on this blogsite are the opinions of district residents (although just how many residents is impossible to know). Board members might not be pleased with the content or tone of these entries, but since they are the opinions of residents (and probably voters) I would think it wise to treat them as matters of concern.·
There’s generally a clear difference between a rant and a thoughtful opinion. Many of the blog entries, for example, are reasonable and make very good points (a few of the rants do, too), so it’s disappointing that these would be dismissed simply because they are not accompanied by a name. I don’t consider most of the blog opinions any less valid just because I don’t know who submitted them.
I believe the board has unintentionally created an atmosphere of fear and distrust. But I also believe they can remedy this if they so choose, perhaps by publicly encouraging respectful comments and discussion, particularly during this transitional time as we enter budget season. If we can’t have open and honest public dialogue in an educational setting, we’ve got much larger problems than we think.There’s a lot of information circulating throughout the district (including on this site) that just isn’t true. Distorted facts and rumors are mostly to blame. But since much of it sounds believable, people tend to believe it, which is troubling. I don’t want our district being perceived as something it’s not, but more importantly, I don’t want district residents basing their budget votes on information that’s just not true.
Democracy works best when voters are reasonable and informed. Unfortunately, I can’t help much with the reasonable part, except to ask voters to be fair and objective. But I can provide information that is factual, and often verifiable. If every voter is informed and a budget goes down, I can accept that. But to know a budget wasn’t passed because voters based their decisions on something that isn’t true? That will be tough to take.
My goal is to eliminate (or at least lessen) that possibility.It’s wise to treat any source of new information (including blog entries and “Letters to the Editor”) with a certain amount of skepticism. Unless a source is reliable, it’s wise to seek out other sources that might confirm what’s being reported, or seek out the information yourself. In addition to having many conversations with dozens of people over the past eight months, I’ve submitted several Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests to the district in an effort to collect some facts. (PLEASE note that I am NOT encouraging everyone to start FOILing. It’s important to understand that FOIL requests take up the time of Business Office employees, and this being budget season is the busiest time of year for them. I’ll be glad to share information I’ve already collected if it means less work for anybody.)
So based upon what I know to be true, research I’ve done, conversations I’ve had with people I trust, and documents I’ve FOILed, I’m comfortable presenting the following:· I had nothing to do with the creation of this blogsite (I have no idea who did) and this is my first entry. Note that my name is on it, as it will be on any subsequent entries I make.· Although the public vote for Dr. Furlong was 9-0, this was not the case behind the scenes. (I do understand the importance of showing unanimous support publicly.)·
The last five (5) budgets were passed by the following margins:
Year Margin In Favor Against #Votes
2007 334 1626 1292 2918
2006 40 1737 1697 3434
2005 220 1746 1526 3272
2004 46 1699 1653 3352
2003 594 2252 1658 3910·
Of the 46 members of the public forum, 2 recommended Dr. Furlong, 2 recommended Gary Cooper, 40 recommended Mr. Dedrick, 1 was divided between Mr. Cooper and Mr. Dedrick, and 1 felt none of the candidates was acceptable.· Newest board member Karen Curran had nothing to do with the hiring of Dr. Furlong. The remaining 8 members along with retired board president Sue Hains oversaw the entire hiring process.·
The fee paid to the superintendent search consultant firm was $13,700.· The cost for the new furniture for the superintendent’s office was $7,727.99.·
I have not been banned from board meetings.·
The 11-page separation agreement (known officially as the “Amendment to Agreement”) between the district and Dr. Furlong (which refers back to the initial 16-page “Agreement” under which she was hired) is a challenging read, so much so that I consulted a lawyer. I summarize what I feel are the major points, which can be confusing:o
From 12/18/07-6/30/08 Dr. Furlong is still Superintendent of Schools and is paid at the same rate as she would have been had she not been granted a “paid Leave of Absence” ($160,000/year + benefits) UNLESS she gets a job that pays at least $120,000/year, in which case the district will pay her 80% of the salary remaining through 6/30/08.o
Following 6/30/08, the “Leave of Absence” expires, and “the Superintendent shall be deemed to have resigned.”
From 7/1/08-12/31/08 the district will pay her “voluntary, post-employment severance” at the same rate as above - $160,00/year + benefits – UNLESS she gets a job that pays at least $120,00/year, in which case payments will cease.o
If as of 12/31/08 Dr. Furlong has not secured personal health insurance, she can elect to continue her health insurance through COBRA coverage for up to 18 months, and the district will reimburse her for up to six months of payments.
Yeah, it’s a lot of money. But let’s look at it another way: If you examine the worst case (where the district’s obligation extends to 6/30/09), we’re in for roughly $200,000.
Although I was unable to establish the number of district taxpayers, I did find out that there are 13,238 parcels of land, and some taxpayers own more than one parcel. So let’s estimate that there are 10,000 taxpayers, in which case the worst-case separation agreement amounts to $20 per taxpayer. (For 8,000 taxpayers it would be $25 apiece.) I think this is a very good deal, and I’m hoping others will see it this way, too.
The greater challenge will be to convince voters not to vote the budget down because they’re angry with the board. The budget vote and board member votes are distinct. If you’re unhappy with the budget, you vote it down. If you’re unhappy with a board member, you vote for someone else.
Typically a budget is voted down because voters are trying to keep their taxes from rising even more. (Sadly, the only place we can easily affect this is with the school budget vote.) This year, however, there’s an incredible undercurrent of negativity rolling through the district, due almost entirely to the arrival and departure of Dr. Furlong and fueled by rumors and untruths surrounding the past 8½ months.
I’ve attempted to clear up some of the misconceptions with this blog entry, and will continue to do so as they arise, because I want EVERY voter to be informed. Voting is larger responsibility than we often treat it as, so please – take the time to learn the facts, share them with your friends and neighbors, and vote your conscience. I know the board is working hard to craft a reasonable, affordable budget, and I’m confident one will be.Choosing to have our four kids educated in the East Greenbush School District was the best investment my wife and I ever made, and we’ll always be grateful to the taxpayers, teachers, administrators, board members and support staff that were responsible. And even though we’re near the end of this road (one to go – a junior at Columbia), we have no intention of abandoning those still in the pipeline, and we’ll continue to support the district in every way possible.
The value of education cannot be overstated, nor can the value of a good school district to the community.As we brace for the very real possibility of our first rejected budget in many years, it’s important to note that throughout all the turmoil and anxiety that has accompanied this school year, teachers and administrators have been able to separate their concerns from their responsibilities and deliver the same fine quality of education we’ve come to expect, all the while insulating our kids from the distractions that plagued many of us. (See the district website home page at www.egcsd.org for some examples of this year’s many accomplishments.) There are two reasons for this recurring success: These people are very good at what they do, and they have the support of a community that recognizes the importance of what they do and the passion and conviction with which they do it. I’m certain they will continue to honor their end of this relationship if we uphold ours.
Sincerely,
Chip Balzer
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Be INFORMED!
Show up to the Budget meetings and BOE MEETINGS! See what this board want's to cut. The money we are paying Notforlong has to come from somewhere. DON'T LET OUR CHILDREN SUFFER BECAUSE OF THEIR ARROGANCE!
Monday, February 11, 2008
GREAT POINT!
At the very least, we get the opportunity to vote in three new Board Members...but more importantly, if indeed, the board members read this blog, as many suspect they do...I hope that they consider the uproar as they prepare their next budget proposal. The taxpayers cannot afford another double digit tax increase, and the BOE cannot blame it on the re-assessment...that's a cop~out! Once the re-assesment takes place, the towns will lower their "rate per thousand", thus keeping the increase manageable. The school district however, is under no such mandate!! Taxpayers should be aware that once the new assesed rates hit, that the BOE is under no obligation to lower the "rate per thousand" which could potentially double some peoples tax bill for EGCSD. The BOE's latest flyer goes to extremes to dodge this point, and they don't want us to know this important fact. I went to the first meetings that GAR held, and the woman from GAR was very explicit about the fact that the Town's will lower their rate per thousand, but she also very carefully said that the School District does not have to lower its rate per thousand. Taxpayers beware !!
Thursday, February 7, 2008
So are we any closer?
Not exactly. We will never know the truth about Becky. My apologies to Supervisor Mc Cabe and Councilman Cristo. A couple of posts got through without me truly reading them. This forum was not intended for a discourse of Town Politics. The personal shots that were taken by someone at you over your right as a TAXPAYER and CITIZEN of this town were blatantly unfair.
The amazing thing to me is that this is the United States of America. You are allowed to voice your opinion without being thrown in jail by the government. Yet people are polarized because of an opinion different than theirs.
The facts as we know them are clear and indisputable;
1. Becky will be paid until she finds a Superintendent Position. A year full salary from us and less over the remaining two years. Read her amended contract. Given her track record only idiots would hire her. So it looks like we are subsidizing a mortgage banking career.
2. Our BOE paid an outside firm taxpayer money to search for a Super. Enlisted the community in the search. Then wanted to take an idividual that had no ties to Terry Brewer. I don't know Mr. Brewer personally or professionally. How did he get such a bad rap by this board?
3. They made a difficult situation for the McHugh Family even more stressful.
Sitting at BOE meetings the arrogance from members of this board is very disconcerting. They are elected officials supposedly representing our community. It is time they go. They don't possess the traits we ask of our children. Honesty, Integrity, Character. They all carry agenda's and we are now seeing that the agenda is not our children.
We need to heal as a community and stop the bleeding before it gets to the children.
VOTE THESE PEOPLE OUT. WE NEED CHANGE ON THE BOARD OF EDUCATION.
ALL POSTS WILL BE READ AND NO LONGER WILL PERSONAL ATTACKS BE ALLOWED THROUGH.
The amazing thing to me is that this is the United States of America. You are allowed to voice your opinion without being thrown in jail by the government. Yet people are polarized because of an opinion different than theirs.
The facts as we know them are clear and indisputable;
1. Becky will be paid until she finds a Superintendent Position. A year full salary from us and less over the remaining two years. Read her amended contract. Given her track record only idiots would hire her. So it looks like we are subsidizing a mortgage banking career.
2. Our BOE paid an outside firm taxpayer money to search for a Super. Enlisted the community in the search. Then wanted to take an idividual that had no ties to Terry Brewer. I don't know Mr. Brewer personally or professionally. How did he get such a bad rap by this board?
3. They made a difficult situation for the McHugh Family even more stressful.
Sitting at BOE meetings the arrogance from members of this board is very disconcerting. They are elected officials supposedly representing our community. It is time they go. They don't possess the traits we ask of our children. Honesty, Integrity, Character. They all carry agenda's and we are now seeing that the agenda is not our children.
We need to heal as a community and stop the bleeding before it gets to the children.
VOTE THESE PEOPLE OUT. WE NEED CHANGE ON THE BOARD OF EDUCATION.
ALL POSTS WILL BE READ AND NO LONGER WILL PERSONAL ATTACKS BE ALLOWED THROUGH.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
CBS6 will air a "You paid for it" special
Monday regarding our situation. Showing the whole capital region how INCOMPETENT this board is. THE FACT THAT THEY BROUGHT NOT FURLONG IN BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANT SOMEONE WITH TIES TO TERRY BREWER IS REPREHENSIBLE. THE ARROGANCE IS MIND BLOWING!
WE ALL SHOULD BE COMPLAINING TO THE STATE EDUCATION DEPT?
WE ALL SHOULD BE COMPLAINING TO THE STATE EDUCATION DEPT?
Friday, February 1, 2008
This is what we could have had.....instead we have been hung by our own BOE and NOTFURLONG!
Congratulations to Charles Dedrick, Cohoes City School Superintendent, and the candidate recommended the focus group to be the EGCSD Superintendent!!!!
In today's Advertiser there's an article announcing that he was the recipient of the NYS Council of School Superintendents Appreciation Award. Only a few superintendents, out of 700, are selected to receive this. He was recognized for his exemplary service, commitment as an emeritus faculty member of the Superintendent's Academy, leadership and guidance, amongst other achievements.
It should also be noted that Mr. Dedrick is a longtime resident of the EGCSD.Credit should also go to the EGCSD Focus group for having the insight to recommend such a highly qualified and well respected individual.
It's unfortunate the BOE decided to ignore the focus group's suggestion and decided instead to hire a much less qualified person from outside the area that was basically pushed out and fired from her previous job as a Superintendent.
CONGRATS CHUCK DEDRICK!!! SHAME ON YOU EG BOARD OF EDUCATION!
In today's Advertiser there's an article announcing that he was the recipient of the NYS Council of School Superintendents Appreciation Award. Only a few superintendents, out of 700, are selected to receive this. He was recognized for his exemplary service, commitment as an emeritus faculty member of the Superintendent's Academy, leadership and guidance, amongst other achievements.
It should also be noted that Mr. Dedrick is a longtime resident of the EGCSD.Credit should also go to the EGCSD Focus group for having the insight to recommend such a highly qualified and well respected individual.
It's unfortunate the BOE decided to ignore the focus group's suggestion and decided instead to hire a much less qualified person from outside the area that was basically pushed out and fired from her previous job as a Superintendent.
CONGRATS CHUCK DEDRICK!!! SHAME ON YOU EG BOARD OF EDUCATION!
Sunday, January 27, 2008
DON'T PUNISH THE CHILDREN BY VOTING NO ON THE BUDGET!
Don't take out your anger on the kids. Voting No on the Budget hurts our children. CHANGE WHO IS ON THE BOE. We will do it three at a time. Joann, Ray and Tom we are coming after you! Your Time is up. WE PUT YOU THERE TO DO RIGHT BY OUR CHILDREN. Your arrogance will hurt them in the long run. It is time for you to go.
MAKE IT EASY AND RESIGN!
MAKE IT EASY AND RESIGN!
Post from Mike Cristo
I expressed earlier that I would do my best to get a better understanding of what has taken place and believe I have some answers, but nothing that really excuses the events that have taken place. I still can't figure out how to make an original post, so I'll post here.
I have spoken with a few different board members who helped me arrive at the following "conclusions" without saying anything definite.Apparently, as elected officials, the BOE is PERSONALLY liable to be sued if they speak about the settlement in any way. Their silence, is an effort to protect their personal finances under penalty of law and for this, I don't necessarily blame them. If only they were as vigilant about protecting our collective tax dollars, as they are about protecting themselves after the fact, we might not be in this mess.
Having spoken to a few members and understanding this aspect, I was encouraged to draw my own conclusions based on the facts, and near as I can tell, this is what I've come up with. Forgive me if I have failed at getting better answers.
I immediately concluded that a mistake was made, either Dr. Furlong in accepting the position or the BOE in hiring her. Since Dr. Furlong is getting paid for not working, I doubt the mistake was hers. Having sufficient information to indicate that Dr. Furlong was not the best candidate or perhaps that another candidate was a better fit, it seems likely the BOE made the error.
In a superintendent's contract, there is typically a one year buy out clause. Once the BOE realized they made a drastic mistake, the only way to minimize the damage was to exercise the buy out. Unfortunately, that deal was struck, as a matter of public record, around Dec. 17th. Dr. Furlong is to be paid until the end of the school year in June, as stated in the BOE release.What the BOE doesn't say is that if she doesn't find a job as a super apparently, (given the other post showing she is working elsewhere), she is to be paid until Dec. 17th of this year '08 according to the buy out clause of her contract.
The BOE, (forgive me for saying so), apparently was more intent on finding a candidate outside of the district and Mr. Brewer's influence, than they were on a candidate with the right qualifications. Dr. Furlong was the only one who fit this description. The BOE had sufficient information on the other candidate and recommendations to support his hire and acted independently, as is their right to do.
Unfortunately, it is an extreme act of arrogance to presume that they as a school board, know more about what the district needs and wants, than the panels of parents and other community members who participated in the process.
Before there is good news, I believe there is more bad. I am of the opinion that, given the anger of residents, they will be unsuccessful in passing a budget. Unfortunately, that hits the students and teachers in the district more than anyone, and at no penalty to the board. A contingency budget requires the cutting of all non-mandated programs which are programs many of us would consider essential in today's society, (all day kind., sports, arts, etc.).
It is my opinion that this board, take it among themselves, to cut as dramatically as possible, everywhere they can and demonstrate that their error, did not cost taxpayers. The cutting of some services would be for one year and could include items such as after school busing, perhaps put off certain purchases, for a period of one year until we get past this incident.
Ideally, those items could be returned in the following year. Any other solution puts this district at risk of a state mandated budget with cuts that effect every student and individual involved in the district. Not really a great solution. Although the $160-$200K that is at issue here, may in fact be a small fraction of an $80 million dollar budget, I get the sense that this is a matter of principle and a means of making the BOE accountable to taxpayers as is their duty.
The good news? We do have some dedicated people in a great school district. We still have great teachers and administrators. We DO have a few board members that have the ability to contribute in a positive way and in my opinion, do not need to be replaced. Among them are Karen Curran and Marie Curley. Mr. Sullivan I do not know nor have I met and Linda Jones I do know, but unfortunately, in my opinion, seems to have been pressured by other board members, which at the heart of the matter is the problem on the board.
Board members should feel at liberty to express their opinion without pressure. I'd also like to add, that I DO applaud the BOE for appointing Dr. Guptil as interim Super. I give her credit for apparently being willing to sit on a powder keg with a road flare.
I find it ironic that one of the very people the BOE found it unnecessary to interview originally, is the current solution.My outspoken nature should not detract from my desire to participate as part of the solution in this situation, rather than continuing to focus on the problem.
I do not believe we can move forward until we have identified where we went wrong in the first place. Inasmuch as I will not impugn the character of any one individual by name, I will leave it to the reader to draw their own conclusions as to where the problems may lie.I hope you find this helpful, I wish I had more definitive answers, but it seems any certain answers will forever reside with the board.
Michael Cristo
I have spoken with a few different board members who helped me arrive at the following "conclusions" without saying anything definite.Apparently, as elected officials, the BOE is PERSONALLY liable to be sued if they speak about the settlement in any way. Their silence, is an effort to protect their personal finances under penalty of law and for this, I don't necessarily blame them. If only they were as vigilant about protecting our collective tax dollars, as they are about protecting themselves after the fact, we might not be in this mess.
Having spoken to a few members and understanding this aspect, I was encouraged to draw my own conclusions based on the facts, and near as I can tell, this is what I've come up with. Forgive me if I have failed at getting better answers.
I immediately concluded that a mistake was made, either Dr. Furlong in accepting the position or the BOE in hiring her. Since Dr. Furlong is getting paid for not working, I doubt the mistake was hers. Having sufficient information to indicate that Dr. Furlong was not the best candidate or perhaps that another candidate was a better fit, it seems likely the BOE made the error.
In a superintendent's contract, there is typically a one year buy out clause. Once the BOE realized they made a drastic mistake, the only way to minimize the damage was to exercise the buy out. Unfortunately, that deal was struck, as a matter of public record, around Dec. 17th. Dr. Furlong is to be paid until the end of the school year in June, as stated in the BOE release.What the BOE doesn't say is that if she doesn't find a job as a super apparently, (given the other post showing she is working elsewhere), she is to be paid until Dec. 17th of this year '08 according to the buy out clause of her contract.
The BOE, (forgive me for saying so), apparently was more intent on finding a candidate outside of the district and Mr. Brewer's influence, than they were on a candidate with the right qualifications. Dr. Furlong was the only one who fit this description. The BOE had sufficient information on the other candidate and recommendations to support his hire and acted independently, as is their right to do.
Unfortunately, it is an extreme act of arrogance to presume that they as a school board, know more about what the district needs and wants, than the panels of parents and other community members who participated in the process.
Before there is good news, I believe there is more bad. I am of the opinion that, given the anger of residents, they will be unsuccessful in passing a budget. Unfortunately, that hits the students and teachers in the district more than anyone, and at no penalty to the board. A contingency budget requires the cutting of all non-mandated programs which are programs many of us would consider essential in today's society, (all day kind., sports, arts, etc.).
It is my opinion that this board, take it among themselves, to cut as dramatically as possible, everywhere they can and demonstrate that their error, did not cost taxpayers. The cutting of some services would be for one year and could include items such as after school busing, perhaps put off certain purchases, for a period of one year until we get past this incident.
Ideally, those items could be returned in the following year. Any other solution puts this district at risk of a state mandated budget with cuts that effect every student and individual involved in the district. Not really a great solution. Although the $160-$200K that is at issue here, may in fact be a small fraction of an $80 million dollar budget, I get the sense that this is a matter of principle and a means of making the BOE accountable to taxpayers as is their duty.
The good news? We do have some dedicated people in a great school district. We still have great teachers and administrators. We DO have a few board members that have the ability to contribute in a positive way and in my opinion, do not need to be replaced. Among them are Karen Curran and Marie Curley. Mr. Sullivan I do not know nor have I met and Linda Jones I do know, but unfortunately, in my opinion, seems to have been pressured by other board members, which at the heart of the matter is the problem on the board.
Board members should feel at liberty to express their opinion without pressure. I'd also like to add, that I DO applaud the BOE for appointing Dr. Guptil as interim Super. I give her credit for apparently being willing to sit on a powder keg with a road flare.
I find it ironic that one of the very people the BOE found it unnecessary to interview originally, is the current solution.My outspoken nature should not detract from my desire to participate as part of the solution in this situation, rather than continuing to focus on the problem.
I do not believe we can move forward until we have identified where we went wrong in the first place. Inasmuch as I will not impugn the character of any one individual by name, I will leave it to the reader to draw their own conclusions as to where the problems may lie.I hope you find this helpful, I wish I had more definitive answers, but it seems any certain answers will forever reside with the board.
Michael Cristo
Friday, January 25, 2008
Are the workshops considered Meetings?
Below was taken from the NYS Committee on Open Government's web page. It explains a lot of what you as taxpayers should know. You can also FOIL Executive Session minutes! It is time that most of this BOE be removed.
What is a meeting?
The term "meeting" is defined as "the official convening of a public body for the purpose of conducting public business." As such, when a quorum (a majority of the membership of a public body) gathers for the purpose of discussing public business, the meeting must be convened open to the public, whether or not there is an intent to take action and regardless of the manner in which the gathering may be characterized.
Who is covered by the Law?
The Open Meetings Law applies to "public bodies." That term is defined to include entities consisting of two or more people that conduct public business and perform a governmental function for New York State, for an agency of the state, or for public corporations, such as cities, counties, towns, villages and school districts. Committees and subcommittees of these entities are also included within the definition. Consequently, city councils, town boards, village boards of trustees, school boards, commissions, legislative bodies, and committees and subcommittees consisting of members of those groups all fall within the framework of the Law.
How do I know if a meeting is going to be held?
The Law requires that notice of the time and place of all meetings be given prior to every meeting. If a meeting is scheduled at least a week in advance, notice must be given to the public and the news media not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting. When a meeting is scheduled less than a week in advance, notice must be given to the public and the news media "to the extent practicable" at a reasonable time prior to the meeting. Notice to the public must be accomplished by posting in one or more designated public locations.
I attended a meeting; and the public body closed the meeting to the public, citing "personnel matters." Is this legal?
The Law provides for closed or "executive" sessions under certain circumstances prescribed in the Law. It is noted that an executive session is not separate from an open meeting but rather is a portion of an open meeting during which the public may be excluded. The Law requires that a public body take several steps to close the meeting. First, a motion must be made during an open meeting to enter into executive session; second, the motion must identify the general area or areas of the subject or subjects to be considered; and third, the motion must be carried by a majority vote of the total membership of a public body.
Citing "personnel matters" is not a sufficient ground for going into an executive session. The motion to go into executive session should be more specific. For example, a motion could be made to enter into executive session to discuss "the employment history of a particular person." The person would not have to be identified.
It is important to point out that a public body cannot vote to appropriate public monies during a closed session. Therefore, although most public bodies (except school boards in most instances) may vote during a properly convened executive session, any vote to expend public monies must be taken in public.
The Law also states that an executive session can be attended by members of the public body and any other persons authorized by the public body.
Can I speak at a meeting?
The Law is silent with respect to public participation. While it has been advised that a public body does not have to allow the public to speak, many choose to permit public participation. In those instances, it has been advised that a public body must treat all persons in a like manner. For instance, the public body can adopt reasonable rules to ensure fairness; i.e., allowing those who want to speak a specific period of time to express their views.
I requested minutes of a town board meeting and was told that I could not have them until they were approved. Is this right? No. The Law states that minutes of open meetings must be made available within two weeks of the meeting; minutes of executive sessions must be made available within one week of the executive session. It has been suggested that if the minutes have not been approved, they may be marked "draft," "unapproved," or "non-final" when they are disclosed.
What is a meeting?
The term "meeting" is defined as "the official convening of a public body for the purpose of conducting public business." As such, when a quorum (a majority of the membership of a public body) gathers for the purpose of discussing public business, the meeting must be convened open to the public, whether or not there is an intent to take action and regardless of the manner in which the gathering may be characterized.
Who is covered by the Law?
The Open Meetings Law applies to "public bodies." That term is defined to include entities consisting of two or more people that conduct public business and perform a governmental function for New York State, for an agency of the state, or for public corporations, such as cities, counties, towns, villages and school districts. Committees and subcommittees of these entities are also included within the definition. Consequently, city councils, town boards, village boards of trustees, school boards, commissions, legislative bodies, and committees and subcommittees consisting of members of those groups all fall within the framework of the Law.
How do I know if a meeting is going to be held?
The Law requires that notice of the time and place of all meetings be given prior to every meeting. If a meeting is scheduled at least a week in advance, notice must be given to the public and the news media not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting. When a meeting is scheduled less than a week in advance, notice must be given to the public and the news media "to the extent practicable" at a reasonable time prior to the meeting. Notice to the public must be accomplished by posting in one or more designated public locations.
I attended a meeting; and the public body closed the meeting to the public, citing "personnel matters." Is this legal?
The Law provides for closed or "executive" sessions under certain circumstances prescribed in the Law. It is noted that an executive session is not separate from an open meeting but rather is a portion of an open meeting during which the public may be excluded. The Law requires that a public body take several steps to close the meeting. First, a motion must be made during an open meeting to enter into executive session; second, the motion must identify the general area or areas of the subject or subjects to be considered; and third, the motion must be carried by a majority vote of the total membership of a public body.
Citing "personnel matters" is not a sufficient ground for going into an executive session. The motion to go into executive session should be more specific. For example, a motion could be made to enter into executive session to discuss "the employment history of a particular person." The person would not have to be identified.
It is important to point out that a public body cannot vote to appropriate public monies during a closed session. Therefore, although most public bodies (except school boards in most instances) may vote during a properly convened executive session, any vote to expend public monies must be taken in public.
The Law also states that an executive session can be attended by members of the public body and any other persons authorized by the public body.
Can I speak at a meeting?
The Law is silent with respect to public participation. While it has been advised that a public body does not have to allow the public to speak, many choose to permit public participation. In those instances, it has been advised that a public body must treat all persons in a like manner. For instance, the public body can adopt reasonable rules to ensure fairness; i.e., allowing those who want to speak a specific period of time to express their views.
I requested minutes of a town board meeting and was told that I could not have them until they were approved. Is this right? No. The Law states that minutes of open meetings must be made available within two weeks of the meeting; minutes of executive sessions must be made available within one week of the executive session. It has been suggested that if the minutes have not been approved, they may be marked "draft," "unapproved," or "non-final" when they are disclosed.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Time to look ahead.......
We need to look forward for the sake of our children. I have gotten a few posts that back the BOE and their actions. To hire a company and ask for community input in hiring a new super and then not take their advice was not good for our children. Now to hide behind confidentiality clauses and put rumors out that she was let go because of something at her last job is not right. Our Children deserve better. They deserve a BOE that has the character and integrity to withstand public scrutiny. THEY ARE PUBLIC OFFICIALS like it or not.
We ask honesty, integrity, and character of our children. Shouldn't we expect the same from the adults that run the district. It is very easy to run a district when no one is watching. But when the spotlight is turned on and the mice scatter that is when we must question this board.
We as a community must move forward. Might I suggest we do so with one eye on this board. Board members must be held accountable for their actions. How can we teach are children to do better with the example they have been shown?
We ask honesty, integrity, and character of our children. Shouldn't we expect the same from the adults that run the district. It is very easy to run a district when no one is watching. But when the spotlight is turned on and the mice scatter that is when we must question this board.
We as a community must move forward. Might I suggest we do so with one eye on this board. Board members must be held accountable for their actions. How can we teach are children to do better with the example they have been shown?
Friday, January 18, 2008
This is a comment that all should read!
To keep this short, it appears that too many people are upset and hesitant about posting a comment or speaking out publicly for fear of some kind of retribution from the school board. There is another solution.First, allow me to note that my comments or involvement is not on behalf of the entire Town Board, but my individual point of view. Second, my criticism of the BOE is not a personal attack, nor do I believe any of our opinions should be personal. I know some of the members and like them on a personal level. However, I have the ability to maintain my objectivity and be critical of their collective handeling of this matter, which seems significantly flawed due to their insistance on hiring Dr. Furlong in the first place. It only seems reasonable that in some way they be held accountable.I will be out of Town for the next board meeting, but I'd like to offer this suggestion.
There is a website for the State Education department: www.regents.nysed.gov/statement this site defines the responsibility of a board member, and under appendix "F", offers an electronic complaint form to report fraud, waste and abuse anonymously. It is my opinion that this board, perhaps not all members, but those who seemingly control the board, are guilty of mismanagement. Their action should be evaluated by the State Education Department.
Share the link with everyone who might otherwise feel powerless or without options.It is an outrage that already there is an indication that when the budget comes up, the students will be threatened with the loss of programs rather than demonstrating some fiscal responsibility and cutting administrative salaries or positions. If forced to cut in an administrative capacity, perhaps they will be a little more careful with tax payer dollars.Those who prey on the weak or use their position to intimidate or control their environment are not fit to serve the community as they have a responsibilty to work in our collective best interest.
In my opinion, this issue is far from being resolved and the board, as requested by a number of residents need to answer the questions posed here.If, for fear of their jobs, people feel that questions can not be submitted to this board, I can be contacted anonymously at my mailbox in Town hall or at cristo4council@mcristo.com. I will gladly submit questions to the board on behalf of the community in my own voice with MY name attached to them... that's what I was elected to do. Those board members who were not party to voting for Dr. Furlong's hire, should make themselves known so we can offer them credit for trying to act in the Town's best interest and replace those who did not.
Respectfully submitted;
Michael P. Cristo Jr.Town Board Member
Father
Taxpayer
There is a website for the State Education department: www.regents.nysed.gov/statement this site defines the responsibility of a board member, and under appendix "F", offers an electronic complaint form to report fraud, waste and abuse anonymously. It is my opinion that this board, perhaps not all members, but those who seemingly control the board, are guilty of mismanagement. Their action should be evaluated by the State Education Department.
Share the link with everyone who might otherwise feel powerless or without options.It is an outrage that already there is an indication that when the budget comes up, the students will be threatened with the loss of programs rather than demonstrating some fiscal responsibility and cutting administrative salaries or positions. If forced to cut in an administrative capacity, perhaps they will be a little more careful with tax payer dollars.Those who prey on the weak or use their position to intimidate or control their environment are not fit to serve the community as they have a responsibilty to work in our collective best interest.
In my opinion, this issue is far from being resolved and the board, as requested by a number of residents need to answer the questions posed here.If, for fear of their jobs, people feel that questions can not be submitted to this board, I can be contacted anonymously at my mailbox in Town hall or at cristo4council@mcristo.com. I will gladly submit questions to the board on behalf of the community in my own voice with MY name attached to them... that's what I was elected to do. Those board members who were not party to voting for Dr. Furlong's hire, should make themselves known so we can offer them credit for trying to act in the Town's best interest and replace those who did not.
Respectfully submitted;
Michael P. Cristo Jr.Town Board Member
Father
Taxpayer
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Monday's Troy Record- Editorial- AMEN!
In Monday's Troy Record:Editorial:
East Greenbush deserves answers
Residents are understandably upset with the lack of information coming out of the East Greenbush Central School District regarding Superintendent Rebecca Furlong.We appreciate the fact there are laws in place limiting the Board of Education’s discussion of personnel matters, but we also know she is paid with taxpayer dollars and she will continue to collect her $160,000 a year salary until she officially steps down at the end of June.Adding to the residents’ frustration is the mystery surrounding her departure after she was just hired last summer and served only four months of a three year contract.Nobody knows why she left or why she is still getting paid through June or who the next superintendent will be. Presently, Assistant Superintendent Angela Guptill is performing the duties but it is not known if she will be a permanent replacement or if the board will search for another.AdvertisementThe board has offered little, if any, elaboration on their initial statement in which they said Furlong "requested" the leave and the board "granted her a paid leave of absence.""The Board of Education and Dr. Furlong depart on amicable terms," according to the statement. Paying someone for not working is indeed one way to remain amicable."The circumstances surrounding Dr. Furlong’s request¬ed leave are due in part to changes in thinking regarding the goals and priorities established by the district since the commencement of services as well as the manner in which they are to be addressed," according to the state¬ment.How drastic can "changes in thinking regarding the goals and priorities" transpire in four months?Board member Tom Chesser told a crowd of about 50 community members that showed up at a meeting, that "this district needs help more than ever." He continued by saying "we must work together to move forward or our students will be the first to suffer."It seems to us those on the board should step up and answer the tough questions rather than try to hide behind flowery statements. In the least, Chesser should stop hid¬ing behind the very students he is elected to serve.We are not saying break any laws governing personnel matters, but the residents living in the district deserve better than what they are getting from the Board of Education.
East Greenbush deserves answers
Residents are understandably upset with the lack of information coming out of the East Greenbush Central School District regarding Superintendent Rebecca Furlong.We appreciate the fact there are laws in place limiting the Board of Education’s discussion of personnel matters, but we also know she is paid with taxpayer dollars and she will continue to collect her $160,000 a year salary until she officially steps down at the end of June.Adding to the residents’ frustration is the mystery surrounding her departure after she was just hired last summer and served only four months of a three year contract.Nobody knows why she left or why she is still getting paid through June or who the next superintendent will be. Presently, Assistant Superintendent Angela Guptill is performing the duties but it is not known if she will be a permanent replacement or if the board will search for another.AdvertisementThe board has offered little, if any, elaboration on their initial statement in which they said Furlong "requested" the leave and the board "granted her a paid leave of absence.""The Board of Education and Dr. Furlong depart on amicable terms," according to the statement. Paying someone for not working is indeed one way to remain amicable."The circumstances surrounding Dr. Furlong’s request¬ed leave are due in part to changes in thinking regarding the goals and priorities established by the district since the commencement of services as well as the manner in which they are to be addressed," according to the state¬ment.How drastic can "changes in thinking regarding the goals and priorities" transpire in four months?Board member Tom Chesser told a crowd of about 50 community members that showed up at a meeting, that "this district needs help more than ever." He continued by saying "we must work together to move forward or our students will be the first to suffer."It seems to us those on the board should step up and answer the tough questions rather than try to hide behind flowery statements. In the least, Chesser should stop hid¬ing behind the very students he is elected to serve.We are not saying break any laws governing personnel matters, but the residents living in the district deserve better than what they are getting from the Board of Education.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
On the EGCSD website.
The East Greenbush Central School District Board of Education will meet on Wednesday, January 16, 6:30 p.m. at the Administration Center for the sole purpose of convening an executive session to review employment histories.
I guess they are afraid to meet in public. Using the guise of personnel matters so that they cannot be criticized.
THIS BOE MUST BE CHANGED!
I guess they are afraid to meet in public. Using the guise of personnel matters so that they cannot be criticized.
THIS BOE MUST BE CHANGED!
Friday, January 11, 2008
Today's Independent
Anger grows over super's deal
01/10/2008
E.GREENBUSH-The Board of Education this week declined to elaborate on a prepared statement announcing the resignation of the superintendent.
That same day, members of the Town Board expressed their displeasure at the decision by the Board of Education to part ways with the superintendent, Dr. Rebecca Furlong. Dr. Furlong, who began work as the district's superintendent last summer, is on paid leave and will resign June 30. She has a three-year contract with the district at an annual salary of $160,000.
During a Board of Education meeting Wednesday at Bell Top Elementary School, board member Tom Chesser told about 50 community members to do their own research and draw their own conclusions instead of listening to rumors. He said laws prohibit him from discussing personnel matters. "Please stop asking us to break these laws," he said. "This district needs help more than ever" from community members, said Mr. Chesser. "We must work together to move forward or our students will be the first to suffer."
Some parents said that the lack of information is making it hard to know what's going on. One parent accused the board of being secretive and not involving the community in its discussion.
"I have no idea... what the board's plan of action is and that worries me as a parent," said a community member. One parent said that when the board hired Dr. Furlong members were acting against the community's recommendation. "This mistake is going to cost the district a lot of money," she said, adding she worried about bringing someone in from the outside.
Dr. Angela Guptill has stepped into the position. Board members did not say how long she will stay or whether the board has started searching for a permanent replacement. Board member John Sullivan said it has been a difficult time. "We've spent a lot of time in private," he said. "We hope that's going to end." Board member Marie Curley said, "It's been hard to remain silent." She said she understood residents' frustration.
"There is trouble [in the district], but we'll get through it, we always do," said JoAnn Hart, the school board president. The next school board meeting is January 23 at 7:30 pm at the Administration Center. During the East Greenbush Town Board meeting Wednesday, Councilman Dean Kennedy continued the theme of concern that Dr. Furlong's $160,000 contract will cost taxpayers.
"As a Town Board member and a community resident, I am quite unhappy that the superintendent has left her position and will still be paid through the end of the school year," he said. "I have asked several school board members about this and I get a pre-canned answer and nothing else." Mr. Kennedy said he and Supervisor Rick McCabe plan to meet with the school board to discuss the situation. "The school board has a responsibility to answer to the public as they are elected officials," said Mr. Kennedy.
Councilman Michael Cristo said he also plans to look into the matter to find out what happened. "I share Dean's discontent about this issue," he said. "I am very big on accountability and take great offense that the school board has acted in a manner that is borderline mismanagement. I want to make sure our tax dollars are not squandered inappropriately. In this case I do not think the school board acted in the best interests of the community." Mr. Cristo said he plans to ask all school board members to step down "unless we get some answers."
01/10/2008
E.GREENBUSH-The Board of Education this week declined to elaborate on a prepared statement announcing the resignation of the superintendent.
That same day, members of the Town Board expressed their displeasure at the decision by the Board of Education to part ways with the superintendent, Dr. Rebecca Furlong. Dr. Furlong, who began work as the district's superintendent last summer, is on paid leave and will resign June 30. She has a three-year contract with the district at an annual salary of $160,000.
During a Board of Education meeting Wednesday at Bell Top Elementary School, board member Tom Chesser told about 50 community members to do their own research and draw their own conclusions instead of listening to rumors. He said laws prohibit him from discussing personnel matters. "Please stop asking us to break these laws," he said. "This district needs help more than ever" from community members, said Mr. Chesser. "We must work together to move forward or our students will be the first to suffer."
Some parents said that the lack of information is making it hard to know what's going on. One parent accused the board of being secretive and not involving the community in its discussion.
"I have no idea... what the board's plan of action is and that worries me as a parent," said a community member. One parent said that when the board hired Dr. Furlong members were acting against the community's recommendation. "This mistake is going to cost the district a lot of money," she said, adding she worried about bringing someone in from the outside.
Dr. Angela Guptill has stepped into the position. Board members did not say how long she will stay or whether the board has started searching for a permanent replacement. Board member John Sullivan said it has been a difficult time. "We've spent a lot of time in private," he said. "We hope that's going to end." Board member Marie Curley said, "It's been hard to remain silent." She said she understood residents' frustration.
"There is trouble [in the district], but we'll get through it, we always do," said JoAnn Hart, the school board president. The next school board meeting is January 23 at 7:30 pm at the Administration Center. During the East Greenbush Town Board meeting Wednesday, Councilman Dean Kennedy continued the theme of concern that Dr. Furlong's $160,000 contract will cost taxpayers.
"As a Town Board member and a community resident, I am quite unhappy that the superintendent has left her position and will still be paid through the end of the school year," he said. "I have asked several school board members about this and I get a pre-canned answer and nothing else." Mr. Kennedy said he and Supervisor Rick McCabe plan to meet with the school board to discuss the situation. "The school board has a responsibility to answer to the public as they are elected officials," said Mr. Kennedy.
Councilman Michael Cristo said he also plans to look into the matter to find out what happened. "I share Dean's discontent about this issue," he said. "I am very big on accountability and take great offense that the school board has acted in a manner that is borderline mismanagement. I want to make sure our tax dollars are not squandered inappropriately. In this case I do not think the school board acted in the best interests of the community." Mr. Cristo said he plans to ask all school board members to step down "unless we get some answers."
Monday, January 7, 2008
Keep showing up to the BOE meetings!
This BOE needs to be replaced. They have become complacent and have that holier than thou attitude. One or two people keep defending the BOE. This BOE doesn't have a leg to stand on. They have shown a blatant disregard for the people in this district. To blame the Administrators, Teachers, Parents for "NOTFURLONG-gate" is a travesty to our district. YOU SHOULD ALL BE ASHAMED OF YOUR ACTIONS. AT LEAST THE FIVE OF YOU THAT WANTED BECKY!
REMEMBER THIS IN MAY WHEN WE CLEAN HOUSE! VOTE YES FOR THE BUDGET. A NO VOTE ONLY HURTS OUR CHILDREN.
It's time Ms. Hart and her followers are shown the door.
REMEMBER THIS IN MAY WHEN WE CLEAN HOUSE! VOTE YES FOR THE BUDGET. A NO VOTE ONLY HURTS OUR CHILDREN.
It's time Ms. Hart and her followers are shown the door.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)