Monday, June 10, 2013

BOE Meeting Tuesday, 6:30PM


It is anticipated that the BOE will go into an Exec. Session at 5:30PM to discuss collective bargaining, the employment history of particular person(s) & pending litigation.

AGENDA ITEMS of NOTE

Customer Service Standards

Supt's Contract ~ RESOLVED, that the Board of Education of the Greece Central School District hereby approves the Amendment to Employment Agreement with Superintendent Deane-Williams effective June 12, 2012 through June 11, 2017. 

Attendance Policies & Procedures

Code of Conduct
 

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

parents and students are nit customers and education is not a commodity

SCATS said...

To 11AM ~~ Back in the day when GCSD was engaged in TQM, parents & students were considered to be customers, as were others ... like taxpayers!

Anonymous said...

These policies on dress code and attendance have language that goes on and on and says nothing.
Simplicity is needed.

Anonymous said...

How nice her contract is resolved! what about the hay contract?

SCATS said...

To 10:58PM ~~ Hay contract??

Jeff said...

What was the amendment to the contract of the Super?
Very nice that the BOE leaves those details off of the agenda?
I missed the meeting, but will assume that there was no discussion and just a quick 9-0 approval of the line item.

SCATS said...

To Jeff @6:40AM ~~ The meeting is tonight. The BOE Prez Julia left it off the agenda. I'm SURE you are correct that all who attend will vote in favor with little discussion.

Anonymous said...

Since this is a personnel item, involving her evaluation and amendments to her contract, discussions can only take place in executive session. The BOE is only required to disclose the details of the amendment and vote on it in open format without discussion. However, each board member can exercise the right to explain his or her vote once the motion is made, seconded and brought to the table for a vote if so desired.

SCATS said...

To 11:43AM ~~ They can tell us what the amendment is! They can tell us why they support it (or not). They can tell us why they came to this conclusion. No one is asking about how they evaluated her. But we have the right to know the details of her contract, any changes made to it & the costs.

Jeff said...

Holy smokes!
It's already been one of those weeks.
I'll try and listen tonight, in between running my kids to and from various activities.

I would still love to know what amendments have been made, or are being considered. Maybe they are doubling her salary?

As member of the tax paying public I think it is is important for our elected officials to keep us informed. Unfortunately, I chose Greece as the place to raise my family.

Anonymous said...

11:43 - That's a pantload of crapple. You are completely and entirely wrong. Open meetings law doesn't mandate that the board discuss issues related to contracts in executive session, it just allows them to do so. There's a big, honkin' difference.

Furthermore, the board is not legally entitled to open an executive session without BEING SPECIFIC about WHICH contracts they're discussing. Citing "PERSONNEL" and/or "CONTRACTUAL ISSUES" is a flagrant violation of the law.

This board meets in executive session before nearly every meeting it has. And, frankly, we all know they're in there talking about things they have no damn business talking about outside of public view.

That's why there's no discussion of issues during the public portions of the meetings anymore.

It's all been hashed out and decided in secret.

Say what you want about HMO, but they sure made certain the board of ed was flooded with disinfecting sunlight.

Seems like the current board sure could use a Lysol enema.

SCATS said...

To 1:10AM ~~ They flagrantly violate the Open Meetings laws almost as often as they violate their own policies & thumb their noses at NYSED laws. They are arrogant & have NO shame. They did meet in Exec. session BEFORE last night's meeting too. Also without specifics, as per their usual modus operandi.

Not only do they decide in secret, they use phone calls, email, etc. to replace discussion so they won't have to go on the record about their individual positions, or risk getting quoted on here ... and sounding like the fools we know them to be. Without H & M, O will be useless!

Anonymous said...

Scats what did I say? I suggest you read my post again. The only complaint you will have is if they don't disclose the amendment. I'm sure they will as it will contain a pay increase. That will no doubt be the amendment and must be voted on. They are under no obligation to explain their vote as you suggest,Some may, some may not. So what and what difference does it really make in the overall. YES. NO on the record. Another point. In order for a board member to comment on his vote, a motion calling for a voice vote must be made and passed. Absent that, a show of hands hands and that's that once the motion to approve the READ amendment and the QUESTIONED CALLED by the president. ROBERT'S RULES OF
ORDER 101 Take it easy for goodness sake!

SCATS said...

To 9:50AM ~~ Robert's Rules??? LMAO!!! They don't follow any rules, let alone Parliamentary ones lol

I suggest you read MY post again. I said they CAN tell us, not that they must. They claim to be transparent, but they are the most closed BOE we've had in a long time. Often they FAIL TO TELL US even the required info, unless someone FOILs it.

Anonymous said...

Whoever wants to accuse the board of violating the law should spell it out. It's not at all obvious that they're doing anything illegal. Wrong, maybe, in a general sense of not being responsive to their constituents, but the law seems to allow their conduct.

For instance, it is mentioned above that not being specific about which contracts they're discussing is a flagrant violation of the law.

But para 105 of the law says that what is required is only "a motion identifying the general area or areas of the subject or subjects to be considered". So citing personnel issues, contract issues, etc seems to meet the requirement.

SCATS said...

To 11:39AM ~~ They are supposed to be in a public session dealing with the topic WHEN they determine they need to go into Exec. Session. They NEVER do it that way. Instead, they decide ahead of time they are going to go to Exec. session without ever bringing the item to the table.

Anonymous said...

11:39 - Please. Leave your apologetics elsewhere It's clear as day. The board breaks flagrantly violates open meetings law.

http://www.dos.ny.gov/coog/zehner.html

"Based on a recent decision of the Appellate Division, as well as earlier decisions, a motion cannot merely parrot the language of a statutory ground for conducting an executive session. It is clear that describing an issue as a “personnel matter,” a “legal matter,” or “contracts,” without more, is inadequate and fails to comply with law. In short, the decision confirms that a motion to conduct an executive session should include information sufficient to enable the public to believe that there is a valid basis for closing the doors."

SCATS said...

To 1:36AM ~~ TY very much! And to think we spend boatloads on lawyers who can't school 'em better!