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