Monday, November 15, 2010

Former Greece BOE Member Speaks Out

  
Current Civil Rights Case is "deja vue all over again"

Joe Moscato said...

I feel compelled to weigh in on this latest travesty. I promised myself I wouldn't get involved anymore, but the circumstances of this debacle made my blood pressure skyrocket.

A week or so ago I got a telephone call from the husband of the victim asking for my help, even though he knew I was no longer a board member and, at that time, had no knowledge of this situation. I agreed to listen to what he had to say anyway.

We talked for over an hour, during which time he made me aware of all of the facts in this case. I couldn't believe what I was hearing because it was so similar to what took place six years ago regarding discrimination of district employees and the resulting EEOC law suits.

He read me parts of a letter he had just composed on his wife's behalf which was addressed to the Board. I asked him to e-mail me a copy which he did moments later. The document was dated November 7 and signed by him.

As I read the document, it occurred to me that 4 years ago, as a Board member, I had read a similar document containing almost the same circumstances, before the "Infamous BARRY REPORT". To me it was, as Yogi put it, "deja vue all over again." It was disheartening to me because I thought that we as a board in 2005 had put an end to this type of unfair, personally motivated reprisals against district employees. Obviously, I was wrong. Apparently the snakes of Medusa have grown a new head which is poisoning the atmosphere by selectively going after targeted teachers. These vile administrators had the audacity to go after her husband, a Deputy Sheriff, and make false accusations against him which resulted in an internal investigation by the Sheriff's Department, which investigation totally exonerated him. Is there no limit to what these people will do to destroy, not only an employee, but their families as well? The answer is obvious.

At any rate I, like SCATS have all the facts including that the district has backed themselves into a corner and are trying to pull a "rope-a-dope" in the form of a deal with the accused.

The bottom line is simply this. As taxpayers we must again force our docile "civil" board to put a stop to these personal vendettas that cost us millions in lawyer's fees to deal with these frivolous personal accusations.

If indeed the Board is aware of these facts, they are guilty of failure in their oversight authority bestowed upon them by the taxpayers and stakeholders of this district.   11/15/2010 12:00 PM

31 comments:

Anonymous said...

Joe
Glad to hear you on this blog again.
We need your activism

This sounds like another morass

Anonymous said...

Sounds like you got one side of the story Joe, from the husband no less? Way to go Joe that's showing your intellegence! Didn't you ever learn that all stories have at least 2 sides, almost all of them have many? I guess the husband's side MUST be 100% factual and unbiased huh?? Please!

Anonymous said...

To Joe, You profess to have "all the information" on this case. Really? Have you talked to all of the 20+ people that were interviewed and provided eye witness testimony in this case? Have you read even a sentence of their testimony? Do you even know that the charges against the teacher in this case are charges that involve levels of abuse and mistreatment against severely disabled special education students by their teacher?

Isn't it true that all you really know is what the husband of the accused told you Joe? You've formed a "complete" opinion based on that and then say you "know all the facts". C'mon Joe! Wake up.

SCATS said...

To 5:01 & 6:40PM ~~ I can't wait to see the proof of abuse against the students, which will be followed by the proof of a conspiracy that was left on Facebook !

Anonymous said...

SCATS, a Facebook conspiracy? Yes of course then it will be followed by JFK turning up alive and that the board members are actually alien life forms...wait, that is beginning to make sense now...

SCATS said...

To 7:48PM ~~ I actually believe what I've heard about the Facebook situation. That part was brought to my attention many months ago.

Anonymous said...

well if it is on facebook it must be true. After all we should all believe everything all the teenagers post on there. Not to mention, if you want people to believe your claim has merit facebook is not the place I would be advocating for support. SCATS, last time you crucified someone before the case was over you had Barry Morris guilty. I think there are 2 sides to this story and not just the husbands. Is it that hard to believe that a teacher may not be up to par and actually may have caved under pressure and done something wrong? Why is it that you automatically assume she is right in her claims? And that last case you were referencing at ATM around the same time was found to have no merit by the courts so I think judgement should be held until both sides are told. What if someone from Greece Central posted stuff on facebook regarding their side, then it must be true too.

SCATS said...

To 9:37PM ~~ Based on your comments, it's clear to me that you have no idea what was posted on Facebook or the relevance it has to this case. The Facebook issue was brought to my attention long ago. I believe it will all be brought out soon.

Anonymous said...

SCATS & all Facebook as proof zealots. All you need to do is study some law and ask what does legal precedence say about Facebook as a source of "proof". Well, to save you some time and sum it up, it says Facebook is by nature, very ambiguous, which means it's considered a very poor and unreliable source of evidence. If your saying there was a "conspiracy" on Facebook, whatever it is, it better be extremely black and white, with specific names & locations & dates & actual "plans" written out so that it is beyond any reasonable doubt that any comments could relate to anything else. If you had that, this whole thing would have been over about 18 months ago. If you don't have that, than your Facebook "proof" could be anything (except proof). Ever been in a book club? Ever have 12 people read the same book and get 12 different interpretations? On an evidential scale, where a smoking gun is 100, and corroborating eye witness testimony is a 90, Facebook rates about a 0.025. Then again what do I know? it's not like I'm a lawyer...

Anonymous said...

Facebook. There is nothing from any students about planning this event. It was GCSD employees!!! I have seen the facebook. They (LB, CM, AC) planned to do this. One of these people (AC) has left the District since...For a better opportunity. A lower paying, nontenured job with no retirement. HMMM. Let me guess he didn't want to burden the taxpayers of NY with his retirement.

Anonymous said...

Joe,
We tried to tell you that things weren't any better, but you wouldn't listen.

In fact, you were snookered by the administration so completely at the time that you posted a list of things that you touted as proud accomplishments of the Kehoe administration that had us (who knew the truth) scratching our heads.

Despite the change at Superintendent, the district remains essentially as it was under the Walts/Keller-Cogan administration with the same people making daily decisions.

It is probably better for you to distance yourself from all of this as much as possible. You are powerless to do any more.

Anonymous said...

When you are among "the favored", your imperfect decisions are considered "learning opportunities". When you are not among "the favored", those same decisions are demonstrations of incompetence worthy of legal action.

I've seen it played out over-and-over since Walts (and his cronies) took over the reigns.

Would the teachers actions (whatever they were) have resulted in the same outcome if they had come from one of the anointed? We all know the answer.

Anonymous said...

Wow, the angry sociopaths in central office's special-ed department are all over this blog with their self-serving psycho-babble. There are always two sides to a story. But when one side has absolutely nothing of substance other than a personal vendetta cooked up against the teacher, then there isn't much to learn from the "other side". Once again the white collar criminals in central office are continuing the terror-tactics taught to them by Walts and accepted by current senior administrators.
The BOE continues to show that it is incompetent, politically controlled, and utterly useless in transforming our district into a high quality and respected operation serving the best interests of our kids. Discover the Promise!!

Anonymous said...

SCATS, I admit to being biased, but if I were you I'd post this on the other related thread too, so that everyone can read this:

Let's play connect the dots that show the treacherous levels of corruption that exist in this district. (to the Miss Sahrle supporter, I make no statement as to whether Miss Sahrle is innocent or guilty of charges. I hope she is actually innocent for the kids' sakes. I simply state the facts that she has been charged).

Here we go....

...Sahrle is brought up on charges by the district for alleged conduct unbecoming a teacher. The nature of the charges detail maltreatment of students with severe disabilities.........

.....Sahrle is removed from her teaching position of the class of students in question but continues to be employed by the district which means they (the District) need a place to put her.....................

...Deb Hoeft, Assistant Superintendent of Special Education, gives Sahrle a job in district office!....

Let's pause and reflect on this. Deb Hoeft, who has brought Sahrle up on charges for alleged incompetence and alleged indiscretions, gives her a job in district office? And what was the job that Deb Hoeft gave Sahrle??? Well, she put her in a cubicle and had her filing CONFIDENTIAL student documents!! Okay, so this is so amazing it deserves focusing on. Deb Hoeft CHARGED Sahrle with not being competent (allegedly) and trustworthy with students (allegedly) and then she has her looking through confidential student files all day as a job??? (let me tell you all of us up there in DO knew that was not only stupid, but completely stupidly stupid.)

(Continued)

Anonymous said...

Let's go on.....

…...As a result of Sahrle's new job up in DO, Hoeft and Sahrle are effectively working together in the same physical space. This is not just extremely awkward for EVERYONE in DO, but it opens up Hoeft for HUGE (and completely avoidable) liability, as we'll soon see....

…..Hoeft, being as socially gifted & intelligent as she is...takes nearly EVERY opportunity to rub Sahrle's nose in the fact that she has been brought up on charges, has lost her teaching job, and is now filing documents all day (extremely confidential legal student documents, that is, even though she cannot allegedly be trusted with students). ….As smart and socially capable as Hoeft is, it somehow escapes her that by doing this she is HARASSING Sahrle on a regular basis.

…..Sahrle takes sick time off of her new DO filing job for diabetes related illness and stress. (believe me, working anywhere near Hoeft is akin to the very definition of stress, so no one can blame Sahrle for this at least).

…..Hoeft, in her infinite and infallible wisdom, professionally reprimands Sahrle for taking time off work (for diabetes and stress) by placing a counseling memo in Sahrle's file. For those of you that don't know, receiving a “counseling memo” from your boss is pretty much the same thing as being written a ticket by a police officer.....

…..It never dawns on Hoeft, the Assistant Superintendent of SPECIAL EDUCATION, that Diabetes is a disabling disease, and stress is a symptom, for which many people take time off work and even worse, that by giving Sahrle a counseling memo (reprimand) for taking time off for this, she has just violated Sahrle's civil rights under the American's with Disabilities Act. It also never dawns on Hoeft that none of this would have happened if she didn't assign Sahrle to a job working in what amounts to the same room as her every day. (In case you haven't already guessed...not much dawns on Hoeft except the sun every morning).

(Continued)

Anonymous said...

….Sahrle talks to a lawyer about this, the lawyer immediately starts drooling a great many $$ signs, and Sahrle and the lawyer promptly sue Hoeft (the district) for, you guessed it, harassment, discrimination and civil rights violation.........

….Hoeft, now implicated for harassment, discrimination, and civil rights violations, gets SCARED (really, really scared). Now HER name is going to be dragged through the mud. Her dreams of becoming superintendent start vanishing in front of her eyes. She Hoeft does what Hoeft always does when she screws up royally. She tries to cover her rear at all costs. So....

…..Hoeft offers Sahrle a deal, or deals. What type of deal/deals? Hoeft offers Sahrle something, probably her job back, maybe money, maybe both, if Sahrle will drop her charges against Hoeft. (maybe now it's starting to dawn on Hoeft that if she hadn't put Sahrle up in district office, filing confidential student legal documents, right next to her, after she had brought her up on charges, then she would not have had the chance to violate her civil rights, and Sahrle would have no case against Hoeft, then Hoeft would not have to get scared and offer Sahrle a deal...nahhhh!).......

….Sahrle doesn't take the deal because her and her lawyer know they have a solid, airtight case against Hoeft for civil rights violations, harassment, & discrimination under the ADA. Maybe Sahrle wants a better deal. Maybe she doesn't want a deal at all. Maybe she wants revenge against Hoeft for bringing her up on charges by winning her civil rights case against Hoeft, which she probably will at great taxpayer expense. So why should Sahrle take a deal anyway? She's going to win her civil rights case against Hoeft, get a ton of taxpayer money as a result, and hurt Hoeft significantly in the process. For those of you paying attention, this is what's known as a Win Win Win situation (the risk to Sahrle if she doesn't take the deal is this: she could very well loose her conduct unbecoming a teacher case, in which case she would still have a win, win, win, loss situation, not bad odds if money and revenge is your thing).

(Continued)

Anonymous said...

....So what does this show, besides the fact that Hoeft is totally and undeniably incompetent to have put herself in a position of liability like she did and that she is an alleged harassing, discriminating civil rights violater? It shows something even more treacherous and corrupt than that, believe it or not. It shows that Hoeft offered Sahrle a deal just to save her own rear end. That's deep stuff, deep as in like through the gates hell deep. Let's not forget, Hoeft brought Sahrle up on charges for alleged conduct unbecoming a teacher for alleged maltreatment of students with severe disabilities. Hoeft, due to her own stupid decisions and incompetence, then violates Sahrle's civil rights and gets sued by Sahrle. So to save her own rear end Hoeft offers Sahrle deals which, if taken, would never have Sahrle be judged, guilty or innocent, of the charges brought against her. The charges that Hoeft BELIEVES Sahrle committed, or she never would have charged her in the first place. (We're going even deeper and hotter now). So Hoeft would give Sahrle her job back, put her back working with students, all the while thinking Sahrle committed the acts she's been charged with, and Hoeft would simply breathe a sigh of deep relief that her own name would be cleared with the civil rights suit dropped and her dreams would again be filled with visions of becoming superintendent. (Seriously, we're boiling here).

Does anyone else here see a conflict of interest with all this? Does it not sit right with anyone else that NO DEAL would have been offered to Sahrle if Hoeft didn't violate her civil rights AFTER charges were brought up against Sahrle? Think about that. Read that again a few times.

Then the justice system would have worked it's way through this and a decision would have been made by a judge concerning the innocence or guilt of Sahrle.

Instead, what is truly happening is this: Hoeft wants to cut a deal with Sahrle, NOT because the case against Sahrle is weak, but because the case against Hoeft is a no brainer, it's stronger than strong. You see, a loss for Sahrle and a loss for Hoeft is, you guessed it, STILL A LOSS for Hoeft.

Now that Hoeft is under the gun, she doesn't care if Sahrle is innocent or guilty, she just wants to save herself, and she'll do anything to do that.

Even so, this is America people. Both Sahrle and Hoeft should and must be considered innocent until proven guilty. This does not mean that either side should be blindly believed based on what they themselves say. NO ONE has all the facts. That's what courts and judges are for. Investigations (independent investigations that is) and trials should be taken to conclusion (In Hoeft's case, a real investigation should begin immediately, the fact that is hasn't already is a gross injustice). All parties should be given the opportunity to defend themselves. The process of justice (the independent variety, not the internal faux variety) should be allowed to be carried out to it's end. The fact that conflict of interest deals are being offered to drop all allegations against both parties with sackfuls of money being exchanged and careers being bargained for does not allow justice to take its rightful course. If that happens, those gates of the infernal abyss will just slam closed forever, locked away and fogotten.

END

SCATS said...

To 8:53AM ~~ WOW! That's pretty revealing!! I hope that I posted it as you intended it to be posted. I will simply make a statement on the other thread that folks should read this. Thank you.

Anonymous said...

While it is true that there are two sides to every story, in this case it is patently obvious that Joe got the right facts. Not knowing anything about the charges or lack thereof against this teacher, just the fact that they went to her husband's employer, falsely accusing him, shows how malicious they are. Their credibility is gone. I don't have to read pages of testimony to know who is right in this case.

This will all come out in the wash and we will see who is right!

Anonymous said...

Joe, Joe, Joe:

TO quote you: ".... he made me aware of ALL the facts." Are you sure? It is always a good story until you hear the other side. Ask any reporter.

And you state "..."costing millions in lawyer fees." Are you sure? I must have missed that line item in the budget.

Be a little careful, plese. Especially as you are writing as a former board member with what that may imply to some people as to your credability.

Anonymous said...

To 5:54 a.m.

You are absolutely right! Everything is back to what it was during the Walts-KC era because those occupying the space in DO are essentially the same . They all studied their craft at the Walts/K-C University of Nazi Administration. There they learned how to falsely accuse, attack and relentlessly vilify anyone who dared to speak. They all passed with flying colors.

Unless and until the people of Greece elect a board capable of hiring an intelligent super who will rid our district of these incompetents, we will continue to spend millions on legal fees to clean up their filthy messes. It looks a lot like our present board doesn't fit that category.

SCATS said...

To 1:10PM ~~ Don't rely upon the people of Greece. They re-elected Auberger despite everything he did, or didn't do that should have cost him his job.

As far as the Greece BOE is concerned, it became completely politicized by Boily et al and it will be very hard to recover from that trend, likely impossible!

Our current BOE is indebted to too many insiders for the safety of their loved ones - spouses who work for the disytrict, children and/or grandkids attending GCSD schools etc. The only meaningful change will be ridding DO of everyone and starting fresh. I don't think that will happen. Do you?

Anonymous said...

12:10 - Just the FACT that this group went after her husband, totally negates anything they say. If you have a clear and honest complaint against an employee, why do you need to attack her family?

I am not Joe, but I know for a fact millions of dollars have been spent in legal fees and awards over the past five or six years because of the incompetence and cruelty of these administrators who try to settle their petty differences by destroying people's careers and now, their families.

What kind of people do these things, there is no need to hear another so-called "side of the story." Enough is enough!!!

SCATS said...

To 3:02PM ~~ I agree!!! And now you can all appreciate (maybe) my need for continued anonymity. People who work for the Town of Greece are no better.

Anonymous said...

to 12:10 pm

Yes it could be a million in attorney fees. If Greece loses this case I believe they are compelled to pay the plaintiffs "reasonable" attorney fees. How long will Greece's lawyers drag this out? How many lawyers will be assigned to this case?

Mr. Crabby Pants said...

Holy cow. Oberg is still alive?

Anonymous said...

SCATS (from 8:53 am), Thank you for posting my connect the dots piece and yes it's in good order, both chronoligically and factually. Thanks to you also for keeping up this Blog & serving the Greece community by doing so. If you could only hear with your own ears the total uproar it's causing up in District Office. (I'm certain they are trying to get you to redact as I write this). Funny how the truth can sting like that, especially when so much is riding on covering things up from the public steakholders. You know, with Thanksgiving coming up, we should stop and think about the value of American History. We teach our kids the virtues of the Patriots of the American Revolution, and how those brave Patriots risked their own well being, and comforts, to stand up and fight for what was just and rightous, despite the odds and consequences which were stacked against them. Hat's off to the brave and courageous amongst us here who do the same, and by doing so, express our Patriotism to the fullest.

Anonymous said...

If only half the administrators in this district
had the sense that God gave goats, we'd
all be better for it. Sadly, that's not the case.

Anonymous said...

I feel compelled to weigh in on this situation. What this DO has done to Miss Sahrle is disturbing. Hoeft & co. set Heather up for this. No one ever thought it would go this far. They assumed she would cave under the pressure of these charges. What only the insiders know is the district has violated nearly the entire process. We at DO are very aware of what is going on. Let me ask you this. If these charges against Miss Sahrle are so egregious why did DO not file the charges with NYS on time? They weren't just filed a few days late. They were filed several months late. Coincidentally, the same day Nadolinski, Hoeft, O'Connor were all served with a NYS Notice of Claim in December from Miss Sahrle.

Anonymous said...

"I know for a fact ..." is once again followed by not a single source.

When I see that phrase, I almost always think "rumor" (or just plain BS).

SCATS said...

To 9:52AM ~~ I know for a fact you're right ;)