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!
Sunday, January 27, 2008
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)