Month: August 2010

Part-time vs. Full-time

In further contemplating the sudden, unannounced and somewhat surprise appointment of Francis (Skip) Finnell, I have come upon some very good questions.

It is my understanding that Mr. Finnell retired from his position, which is what precipitated Joe Cucinotta’s hiring.  If Mr. Finnell retired, then he is only permitted to work part-time lest he jeopardize his retirement income.  Therefore, does this mean that not only has the Superintendent’s unilateral decision to withhold the information about his resignation forced the School Committee to forfeit the benefit of having Mr. Cucinotta’s three months’ notice period to find a permanent replacement, but that the School Committee has, in fact, appointed an interim Director of Finance and Operations who is only able to dedicate his services on a part-time basis?

Is Mr. Finnell’s interim appointment subject to an employment contract or has he been hired as a consultant on an independent contractor basis?

If he is an independent contractor, were there bids requested (pursuant to MGL c.30B) for these services?

From what I have learned about the district’s employment provisions (and retirement provisions), I am fairly certain that Mr. Finnell must only be committed part-time.  If I am wrong about that, I’ll be happy to correct that assumption right here.  But I’m feeling fairly confident, so I’ll go forward on that educated guess.

If the School Committee feels that, in the midst of the current budget crisis the district is facing, a part-time Director of Finance and Operations is plenty sufficient, then surely the School Committee should be looking at what savings can be enjoyed by permanently replacing the position with a part-time employee.  Imagine the savings by not having to provide full-time benefits and full-time retirement and sick pay and vacation pay, etc.  Interesting concept . . .

Conversely, if the School Committee recognizes that the Director of Finance and Operations most assuredly must be fulfilled on a full-time basis, then I contend that the Superintendent has placed the entire district in a very tenuous and unfortunate position and her negligence has [yet again] compromised the integrity and ability of the School Committee to perform appropriately.

When can the public speak?

One of the more notable and interesting things which came out of the School Committee meeting last Wednesday night (August 11th) was that, apparently, the Chairman of the Committee took the position (but only after being told to do so by the Superintendent) that the public is only allowed to speak at meetings on issues which are on the agenda.

The public is permitted to send a request, in writing, to the Superintendent to have an item placed on the agenda so that it can be discussed at the School Committee meeting.

So, if a citizen wishes to ask the Committee a question on an issue that affects the school district and is within the scope of the Committee’s responsibilities, even if it is one question or comment which requires little or no response from the Committee, the Chairman/Superintendent is now requiring that citizen to submit a written request five days prior to the meeting.  Does this sound productive and effective?  Does this sound like the methodology of an elected governing body which wishes to foster and promote an exchange of dialogue with its electing public?

An example: My son comes home from school complaining that every teacher in every class used their classrooms as platforms to “sell” the budget override to the students and he tells me that every teacher threatened the students that if their parents “voted for the budget cuts” that there will no longer be sports, music or the library in the schools.  Now, me being the concerned and committed parent that I am, I call the school administrators and am told there is no policy which precludes such behavior and that my recourse is to speak to the School Committee.  So I attend the next meeting and during the citizen comment period I wish to ask the question, “I’ve been told there is no policy in place which prohibits teachers from using their classrooms as platforms to further their personal political agendas.  Is this true?”  To which the School Committee Chairman would look to the Superintendent (as he always does) for an answer and she would reply “We are in the process of developing one.”  That exchange would take less than two minutes.

But because it isn’t already on the agenda (and just think of the variety of questions or comments which a parent/citizen might have that would never come up on an agenda), I would be told that I was “out of order.”  Instead, I would have to learn when the next School Committee meeting is, write a letter and be sure to mail it in time for it to arrive at least five days prior to the meeting, so that the Superintendent can chew on the request and decide if it’s worthy of discussion (or does she automatically place every request on the agenda?) and her assistant (very nice lady, by the way, and seemingly very competent, Maureen Burnham) would add it to the agenda.  Then, at the meeting, my simple question would be addressed with great importance and reverence.  Imagine if every parent who ever has a question or comment for the Committee had to follow this procedure.

There are most assuredly topics which warrant special inclusion on the agenda and extended discussion.  But the purpose of the citizen comment period is to allow the community an opportunity to comment to the School Committee on issues that affect the school district and are within the scope of the Committee’s responsibilities.

If the purpose is to allow comments and questions only on the items on the agenda (which, by the way haven’t been presented and discussed by the Committee yet since the question/comment period is first), then the Chairman should not be entertaining comments or questions from citizens during discussion of the agenda items – and the Chairman did allow this to occur Wednesday night and often does.

I am recommending to the School Committee that a specific policy be put in place which clarifies the public comment period of School Committee meetings and which allows comments/questions from citizens on any topic (regardless whether it is on the agenda) which affects the district and is within the scope of the Committee’s responsibilities provided such comments and/or questions can be addressed within a few minutes.  I have outlined my recommendation in the letter linked below.

SC Public Comment letter

MASC Guidelines

MASC Guidelines2

Inhibiting, limiting, restricting and quieting the public does nothing but further the already obvious perception that the School Committee does not wish to foster and promote open dialogue and transparency.

August 16 School Committee Meeting

Since the meeting packet and agenda are not published on the School District website, I thought I would make it known that there will be a School Committee meeting tonight, Monday, August 16th at 7:30pm at Station Avenue Elementary School.

It appears that one of the topics will be discussion on the recommendation made at the Special Town Meeting that a Finance Subcommittee be formed.

Whether the taxpayers are in favor of the budget override or against it – it was certainly clear at the Special Town Meeting that everyone agrees there is a need for more eyes on this important issue.

Fuzzy numbers

A great deal of time was spent at Wednesday night’s School Committee meeting trying to clarify various budget bottom line numbers, shortfalls, reductions, cuts, etc.

Let’s see, there’s a budget of $48,711,000 there’s a 1/12th budget, there’s a $503,000 shortfall, there’s the offer from the town to split the shortfall $250,000/$250,000 but because of the Regional Agreement, we’d actually have to come up with $385,000, then there’s actually some $675,000 shortfall if we go with the 1/12th budget (or was that the voted budget) and I heard $835,000 less than one of the budgets and an approximately $100,000 short of some other budget.  Do I hear $1.2 million?  Can I get a bid for $1.3 million?

Honestly, it sounded more like an auction at Sotheby’s than a school district budget discussion.  And that’s no accident.  The more confusing it is, the more likely the public is to throw up their hands and just agree to whatever is being fed to them.

Or so the School Committee would like to think.

But the voting public is not as dim-witted as our elected officials assume and voters are asking questions and they want clear answers.

For my own sanity, I am going to give this the old college try to see if I can make heads or tails of all of these crazy numbers and if I figure it out (or if I can muster up the patience to call the Superintendent or the Interim Director of Finance and ask for it to be explained), I’ll post what I learn.

Meanwhile, I know that however they wiggle and confuse and muddy and fuzzy the numbers – as one reader commented to a previous post on this blog:  the voters in Yarmouth are not asking that teachers and programs be cut, we are asking that the administrative fat be trimmed from the budget.

The secret resignation of the Director of Finance and Operations

Last night’s School Committee meeting went relatively as I expected it would with a couple notable exceptions.  The first item on the agenda was to approve the appointment of an interim Director of Finance and Operations.  You see, unbeknownst to the School Committee or to the public, the former Director had proffered his letter of resignation and his last day of employment was Friday, July 30th.  I know this because I called the Director’s office with a request for more detailed financials at the end of July and when I called on Monday, August 2nd to follow up on my request, I was told that Mr. Cucinotta was no longer working there and that Friday, July 30th was his last day.  I was also told that an interim Director had been appointed.

A call to Carol Woodbury’s office confirmed that, in fact, the Superintendent had appointed an interim Director and that she apparently has the unilateral authority to do so.  I have requested a copy of Mr. Cucinotta’s resignation letter and employment contract.

This brought up a lot of questions in my mind because I have read the Minutes of the School Committee meetings in 2010 and there was no mention of Mr. Cucinotta’s resignation.

For such a vital position, I assumed there must be exit provisions in the employment contract.  What is the required amount of notice that must be given?

How much notice did Mr. Cucinotta give?

When was the School Committee notified of his resignation?

Why was a permanent replacement not sought rather than appointing an interim Director until a permanent replacement is hired – and who made that decision?

At a time when the entire district’s level of transparency and accountability is being called into question with great fervor and in the midst of a hotly debated budget battle, why would Superintendent Woodbury make the unilateral decision to withhold such pertinent information from the School Committee and from the public?

I asked the questions.

Woodbury “believes” (but wouldn’t say for certain without having the contract with her, lest she misspeak) that the Director must give 60 days’ notice.

Mr. Cucinotta gave “about” three months’ notice.

The School Committee was notified “recently.”  When pressed for a more specific answer [and why does one always have to press her for more specificity?], she indicated it was within the last couple of weeks.  Since Mr. Cucinotta’s last day was exactly 12 days ago, the Committee was notified on or about his last day of employment – after giving ample three months’ notice!

I expressed my distress over the fact that the Superintendent made a unilateral decision which is, in my opinion, detrimental to the entire district.  I believe that the district would be far better served had she used that three months to hire a permanent replacement who might have had the benefit of working with Mr. Cucinotta for some period of time and which would have guaranteed more continuity and a smooth transition, rather than now – right when budget negotiations are peaking – bring in an interim Director and then transition again to whoever is hired as the next Director of Finance and Operations.  And it is no accident, I am sure, that not appointing an interim Director until Mr. Cucinotta’s last day will guarantee further delays in doing more work on the budget as the interim Director familiarizes himself with it.  He’ll probably just have to take the word of the Superintendent on a lot of what he sees.  What a shame.

I hope that my questions have at least shed a bit of light on exactly the type of hiding and withholding of information that goes on regularly by the Superintendent.  Again, she seems to forget that the School Committee, and conversely the entire voting public, are her employers – not the other way around.

It is unconscionable that the Superintendent is permitted to orchestrate, manipulate and control the actions of the School Committee.

Some of what I’m looking for

I requested more detailed information on the budget and expenditures from the Superintendent’s office and today, I received the following attachments.

3-1-10 CAW Presentation

FY11 Budget -March 1

I’ve only had a chance to glance through what was sent to me, but it certainly looks like information that should have been and should always be readily available to the public, without having to ask for it and wait until it is sent to you.

Tonight there is a School Committee meeting and I’m sure we’ll hear about the necessity for a district meeting, which from what I can gather from the Mass General Laws, is the next step in this process – unless, of course, the School Committee has the gumption to take another stab at reducing the budget?  I’m not hopeful, but we’ll see.

Baby steps

I’ve asked a lot of questions.

Question: Why isn’t the real budget published on the district’s website?  (Answer: It used to be but then for some reason, all of a sudden, it disappeared from the website and what’s there now replaced it.)

Question: Why did it disappear and why doesn’t the School Committee know why it disappeared?  (Answer: I don’t know.)

Question:  Why aren’t the Minutes of the meetings published on the district’s website?  (Answer: The video archive of meetings are available for viewing on the website.)

Question:  Providing video and audio of a meeting is fine, but many people don’t have time to sit through hour after hour of watching the School Committee vote on whether or not to accept a $5 donation.  If we have the technology to upload videos of the meetings, don’t we have the technology to upload pdf versions of the Minutes which can be perused in less than the time it takes to watch the meetings on video?  (Answer:  I don’t know.  I’ll look into it.)

Question:  When the most rudimentary and basic documentation is missing from the website, or is there but then goes missing (suddenly and without explanation), isn’t it reasonable to expect that suspicions will be raised in the minds of taxpayers?  And if the School Committee and/or the Superintendent truly wishes to be fully transparent and isn’t hiding anything, why has it not been published and readily available in the past?  Isn’t it just plain, old good PR – if you can find no other reason to do it (and I can find many reasons, none the least of which is that it is PUBLIC information!)?  (Answer:  I don’t know.  I’ll look into it.)

I asked the questions and today I was notified that the School Committee meeting packets (which includes Minutes of all the meetings) will be uploaded to the website soon.

Be still my beating heart.  Baby steps, folks, baby steps.

August 11th

The next School Committee meeting is scheduled to take place at 6:30pm on Wednesday, August 11.

It will be interesting to see what measures the Chairman takes to preclude the public from speaking on the issue of the Finance Director’s resignation (interesting timing on that, eh?) and/or the possibility of another district meeting (a/k/a “tent meeting”) like two years ago.

It won’t surprise me this time, but it will be duly noted and properly and thoroughly investigated.

I hope to see all interested parties at the meeting.  I’ll post more information as and when I receive it.