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