Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Was It Legal?

No, it was NOT legal!
It's official. The BOE will attempt a "do over" on two votes from last evening where only 4 people voted to carry the motion.

Last night only 6 board members attended the meeting. When they began dismantling the budget and voting on each item up for the hatchet, most votes were 5 in favor with 1 opposed. However, on the issue of eliminating *$170,000 for an Athletic Director, a modified football team et al, the vote was 4 to 2. The same outcome occured on a vote for eliminating transportation for Pre-K. Is it legal for only 4 members of a 9 member BOE to pass such an action? It seemed unusual to me ... so I've asked a BOE member. I'll let you know the response.

* I initially and erroneously said it was for a different position. My apologies

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

According to education law a quorum is a simple majority (more than half) of the total number of board members. A quorum is required to conduct any business. A majority of the entire board, not simply of those present, is required for the board to take any official action. If a board has five members, for example, and three are present at a meeting, all three would have to vote in favor of a resolution for it to pass - a two to one vote would not be sufficient.

Greece has a 9 member board so 5 members MUST vote in the affirmative for a resolution to pass. No, the 4-2 vote is NOT legal and is not sufficient.

The reference for this is Opinion of Counsel #70, 1 Educ. Dep't Rep. 770 (1952); see also Appeal of Greenwald, 31 Educ. Dep't Rep. 12 (1991)

Anonymous said...

OH Stop it, JUST STOP IT!

Little Roger Rabbit knows what he's doing. Rogie has a track record.
He failed as a 5th grade teacher
He failed as a Supervisor
AND
NOW he's failing at the schools once more.

When did Rogie ever let the law stand in the way of what he wanted to do?

SCATS said...

To 2:11PM ~~ Thank you. I'm told that pg. 69, Section 3.6, 31st Edition of the School Law book concurs with you.

Anonymous said...

How could they be that uninformed? And don't they have a lawyer attending all their meetings? This is getting at my last nerve. It is a good thing that scats is paying attention to these meetings.
I'd say let the paper handle this but she thought a 6 vote was unanimous. Help us somebody.

SCATS said...

To 3:27PM ~~ Let's put this into perspective. Our BOE Circus Posse Prez is a lawyer. Two strikes to him for reading the vore tally without catching it. Another BOE member, Boily, is a former town supervisor, so two strikes to him, too. He should know better. Our lame duck Supt. who earns $200K+ didn't catch it despite his decades of experience. Three strikes to him, even though I doubt he cares. Our BOE VP couldn't figure it out if he had to. Neither could the other members in attendence. Then there's our District Clerk who gets some really HUGE pay increases. It got by her too. It's pretty obvious that no one at the BOE table either knows the laws, cares or knows what they were doing. Bottom line: the tax payer's are destined to keep taking it on the chin as the lawsuits pile up.

Anonymous said...

Think about it. Does that mean that if only 60 US senators attend a session we only need a vote of 31 to pass something. We need 51 to pass anything. In some cases we need a 2 thirds vote to override a veto. It is sad that our school board could flunk a civics class test.

Here is a primer for the board:
To hold a meeting you have to have a quorum which is 5 in attendance.
To pass a motion you have to have 5 votes in favor of the motion. No matter if there are 5 or 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 board members in attendance.
A majority of our board must pass the motion. Not just a majority of the board that is in attendance. This is Roberts rules which we follow according to our district policy.
To pass certain motions you have to have a 2/3 vote in favor which is 6 votes.
They could not be that stupid. They must have thought we wouldn't pick up on the fact that they slid something through illegally.

Anonymous said...

Maybe they are confused because at their yacht club meetings after they have a quorum there, any vote just needs a majority of those that are there to pass.

Anonymous said...

i could be wrong but I believe in say the house of representatives, there has to be a majority of all members to pass a bill no matter how many members are present (assuming enough for a quorum)

The village idiot said...

Quorum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quorum

Board of education membership: 9

A quorum in Greece: 5 people present to conduct the business of the group.

A 4-2 vote means 6 people were present.

6 > 5 (Note to Apollo's East Side Administrators: The ">" symbol means "is greater than")

The Board of Education may legally conduct business.

Next foolish rant, please?

SCATS said...

To 2:51PM ~~ I believe there is a distinction between having enough members present ( a quorum) and having enough members supporting a motion for a vote to pass it. There were enough members present to have a meeting. Apparently, NY Education Law requires a MAJORITY to transact business. In that event, they were out of order "passing" anything on a 4 to 2 vote.

Anonymous said...

A quorum is the mechanism for determining adequate representation for conducting business without further restriction or limitation.

The vote took place with a quorum present. The majority of the quorum prevailed.

SCATS has been dealing with East Side administrator logic for much too long. :)

SCATS said...

To 5:52AM ~~ East side administrators have logic?? Who knew!?