Wednesday, February 10, 2016

See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil ...




BOE KNOWS NOTHING, 
EVIL OR OTHERWISE ... 


Anonymous Anonymous said...
My understanding is that board members still do not have a copy of the latest Teacher's contract, nor do they know how much the cost will be over the life of the contract. It is still being "negotiated." How can that be if the board voted to approve it? And, how will the board adopt a budget if they don't know the cost of this union contract? Since union contracts about 75% of the cost of our annual budget, why doesn't the board know the cost??? If the board is limited to a .12% budget increase over last year how do they think the taxpayers are going to pay for it????
2/10/2016 7:57 AM

35 comments:

Anonymous said...

Out of reserve funds already imposed and sequestered for a rainy day. If they don't ask for that figure specifically they won't get it. They probably approved that amount under the Consent agreement part of an agenda item at a previuos board meeting.it really wouldn't be hard to guesstimate given that yearly step increases are in the 3-4% range every year. Unless the step increase were modified in the new agreement that would remain the same compounded by any across the board increase over the term of the agreement or concessions in the area of health care.

If they don't ask maybe you should attend the meeting and ask that question. Better still if the agreement is in written form Foil it.if it's a Hand Shake agreement you are screwed. I would think that of all current board members Frank Oberg would concerned over this as he has in the past as a budget watch dog especially in the area of employee wages and budget implications.

SCATS said...

To 1:20PM ~~ What the heck do you mean by "if the agreement is in written form"??? Union contracts, MOA's etc. MUST BE WRITTEN & BOE-approved!

Anonymous said...

Of course I know that! I was responding to the posted thread comment that IT WAS STILLBEING NEGOTIATED which indicated nothing was in finalized form simply agreed to and not in completed format. If it's true then it the contract, was still incomplete,the actual cost figures would still not necessarily be available .

Charlie Hubbard said...

First of all I encourage any and all readers to read policy 6431 so they don't make a stupid posting like 1:20.
Contracts are THE most important items boards deal with. Worthless, do/nothing, give/away contracts have been and continue to be THE biggest problem with public education.
At no time should teachers or the unions should be held accountable - it is however 100% the responsibility of school boards to approve contracts that are not only affordable but that also contain accountability via educational improvements.
A message from the new super in Buffalo recently said 'the biggest problem we have to educational improvement in this district are the CONTRACTS'.
The Rochester school board turned over control of that district to the teachers union in 1986 shunning their responsibility and the quality of education has been down hill ever since and costs continue to be out of control - all thanks to an incompetent school board.
In 2006 we put together policy 6431 holding the Greece school board accountable for knowing the cost of a contract prior to approval (quality is covered in other polices). This policy also speaks to making copies available to members of the public along with cost knowledge. I went to the April 28th meeting when this contract was approved - NOT ONE WORD WAS SPOKEN ABOUT HOW THIS CONTRACT IMPROVES EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES - NOT ONE WORD ABOUT THE COST.
After the meeting I asked the finance director, the board clerk, and a board member for a copy to include the cost analysis - no one had one. I filed a foil request the next day - 30 days later I asked again and was told it was not ready - 2 weeks later I got it (pure junk) as there is no comparison to the prior contract. In mid Dec. I foiled for a copy of this contract. I was told today it should be ready in about 2 weeks - yes the same contract voted on in April is still not available.
So tell me - HOW WE DOING????
Scats; if possible please post policy 6431

Anonymous said...

If board members did not have a written, bound teacher's contract with the corresponding costs associated with it BEFORE they voted to approve it then they are just plain incompetent. And the union is laughing all the way to the bank again!

SCATS said...

To 5:19PM ~~ There is no "IF" about it! Until a new contract agreement is reached and adopted by the BOE, the previous contract remains in force, ALL OF IT. And it should ALWAYS be readily available for anyone who asks to see a copy.

To Charlie ~~ Will do.

To 7:34PM ~~ That wouldn't be the first time!

SCATS said...

BOE Policy # 6431
EMPLOYEE CONTRACTS AND ADDENDUMS


The district shall prepare an estimated cost for each portion of any new employment contract or
addendum to the extent feasible. The estimated costs will include the anticipated amount needed for
each year of the new contract or addendum. This cost estimate shall be attached to all new contracts
or addendums and shall be available to the public. It will be the responsibility of the superintendent
and the Human Resources Department to have these figures available, if possible, ten days prior to any
Board discussion of contracts and/or addendums.

The Board will discuss and report the projected costs of such contracts in open session and the
projected costs will be recorded in the official meeting minutes.


The Superintendent, the Executive Director of Human Resources and Support Services and the Board
Officers, will be responsible for coordinating these tasks.

The Superintendent and Board of Education Officers will review this policy every three years.

Anonymous said...

I hear rumors that staff $3x liasons, an alcoholic teacher, and security lapses are dominating the Districts time. With those issues biding their time, how could any Supt, board member, or administrater be expected to focus on contracts, budgets, and education! Let alone the safety of your kids!!! Yeah this is a heads up for the guy you hired as the safety leader! Seems that with his boss leaving for East, there's been a real lack of any commitment to excellence.

Anonymous said...

Charlie, might I assume that you voted to approve the language and intent of this policy. I wouldn't go so far as saying you were stupid to vote to approve this policy as written. On the other hand it wasn't too smart to vote to approve it as written. Why is it then that I arrive at this conclusion? After reading the posted policy the intent of this policy was abundantly clear. However two words tend to reduce its effectiveness . Those words are IF POSSIBLE. Those two words give the district ample opportunity to not completely comply with the intent of the policy. concerning the time allowed to comply with the desired information.This mistake does not impose a definate period of time given the district to provide the required information to the BOE. Therefore this language gives the district an opportunity to drag their feet and prioclaim that 10 days represented a period of time impossible to comply with. The response time should have been expressed in a definate period of time instead of open ended as written.

Anonymous said...

Why would it be so important for the prior superintendent to put in place a new contract that the new superintendent must work with rather than waiting for the new superintendent to put her stamp of approval on it. Why the big hurry to approve a contract that was unfinished?

SCATS said...

To 6:23PM ~~ Nice try but your argument "definately" doesn't hold water. First of all, the "if possible" only refers to having the figures available 10 days in advance. Second of all, the policy is up for review & revision every few years, so it is possible the wording was changed AFTER Hubbard's tenure on the BOE ended.

To 9:30PM ~~ One word: CONTROL.

Anonymous said...

If I read you correct SCATs you are agreeing with me on the need revisit that policy after its origination in 2006 Apparently it wasn't as I would suspect you posted the most current policy available which stands unchanged after 10 years and after three revision cycles during that time.

SCATS said...

To 6:27AM ~~ No Joe, I didn't say the policy needed revision. I said that as a matter of routine, it has been revisited/revised since it was originally adopted. ALL policies are routinely reviewed & updated by the BOE. There is no way to tell whether or not it has changed, since its adoption.

Charlie Hubbard said...

to 6:23 (anonymous)
No need to 'assume' I voted for the policy - yes I did and I was very much responsible for putting it together.
You can nic/pic the wording if you want - so do as 1:20 recommends and go to a board meeting and ask to get it changed (good luck). Phony!
I will 'assume' you feel it is ok to approve a contract without knowing the cost or how to pay for it - if so you would make a perfect board member (fit right in).
To use your words you would have to be a special kind of 'stupid' to do business as it is being done now.

Anonymous said...

I think you people should get off your big buts and run for the school board and show us how to do it. You could run as a team (tag) and you can call yourselves Eanie , Meanie and Mineymo.

SCATS said...

To 3:37PM ~~ WHY should we/they??? People who WANTED to be on the BOE and took an oath to uphold the laws and Constitution, then signed an "ethics pledge" immediately become so arrogant they thumb their noses at the rest of us! NEWS FLASH: They were elected TO SERVE ALL OF THE PEOPLE!

BTW, it takes FIVE VOTES to accomplish anything on the BOE. Only three seats are open each year.

Anonymous said...

OK run for those seats. You have admitted more than once that SCATs is administrated by more than one person. Go for it and you will win with ease. SCATs could continue with new leadership in its present form and be privey to factual information instead of rumor and speculation on matters concerning the school district.

SCATS said...

To 5:29PM ~~ We live in a democracy. Nowhere does it say that those who disagree with govt must run for office to fix it. As stated many times previously, it is everyone's right to complain AND the electeds are supposed to represent ALL, not just their special interest groups. At this low level of govt - BOE (my God they aren't even paid), we can see the corruption created by those chosen to do a job they supposedly WANTED to do ... they allow themselves to be consumed by their power once the oath is taken. Being targeted by bloggers and other critics is the consequence of that behavior. DEMOCRACY - FREE SPEECH - THE RIGHT TO CRITICIZE :)

Anonymous said...

Policy 6431 serves no purpose unless someone cares to know - BOE members and/or the public, and someone wants to make use of the information. It is very apparent that neither cares to know, or to make use of it!

SCATS said...

To 7:56PM ~~ Sorry, but you are wrong. The BOE's job is TO KNOW such things and to protect the taxpayers from unnecessary expenses and rising taxes. Some of them even ran on such platforms ... how quickly they forget. Right Frank?

Anonymous said...

To: 1:08am: What is your basis for the myth, “The BOE's job is TO KNOW such things and to protect the taxpayers from unnecessary expenses and rising taxes.” Education Law makes no such mention under duties and responsibilities of BOE members.

If BOE is not meeting expectations, let members be replaced... be it the will of sufficient number of taxpaying voters.

SCATS said...

To 12:54PM ~~ There's no "myth" at all! It IS their duty to follow ALL laws, rules and policies. If they aren't following Policy 6431 which they themselves instituted to help protect taxpayers by forcing the BOE to be cognizant of their actions, then they ARE BREAKING THE LAW.

LMAO @"be it the will of sufficient number of taxpaying voters" ... There's barely enough people interested in serving on this phony, corrupted board, let alone getting people out to vote! People realize their votes really don't count for much. Look at Oberg. He's NOT the person he was when he originally ran to be on the BOE, but I'm sure his wife is glad it gets him out of the house.

Anonymous said...

To: 4:07pm: BOE in doing its job owes (directly) nothing more and nothing less to taxpayers than to any other member of a school district. BOE is responsible for: a) The enrollment, instruction,… of students, b) The hiring of staff, and c) The availability of buildings, grounds, equipment and supplies of a district. Its all about education and students.

Taxpayers are protected directly by district wide referendum on budget. Indirectly they can promote election of likeminded BOE members.

SCATS said...

To 4:32PM ~~ Wrong! They take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the State of New York, AND the laws, their own policies, rules, etc. That includes Policy 6431.

Anonymous said...

A policy is a statement that establishes standards and/or objectives to be attained by the district. A school board policy should clearly state the board’s view of what it considers to be the mission of the district, the objectives to be reached and the standards to be maintained...

Policies become local law. The commissioner of education may enforce policies being violated by a local school board.

Anonymous said...

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the State of New York, and I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of..., according to the best of my ability.”

SCATS said...

To 5:32 & 6:01PM ~~ THANK YOU BOTH!

Anonymous said...

Bottom line BOE couldn't care less about what is said on this site. Removal of board members is the prerogative of the Ed commissioner .
I held a job in the administrative office of the district back in the mid 2010 yrs. at that time three newly elected board members were subjected to complaints to the commissioner by the Superintendant . She asked for their removal due violations of her contract and interference with operation of the school district. In response he sent a representative to attend one of the hearings being held to place her on suspension. We knew who he was and he was there. I doubt if any board members knew this was happening. He was to report directly to the commissioner. We would find out later through the grape vine that in his report he stated that certain members of the board had clearly crossed the line between their duties and the duties of the Superintendant but stated that there was no cause for action because the operation and administration of the district justified their actions due to the gravity of the circumstances and for the Welefare of the district.
Unfortunately our present BOE members are going strictly by the rules spelled out in the duties of the BOE as opposed to those of the Superintendent
I still live in Greece but I work in another school district now and our school board goes strictly by the book. The only difference I see is that on some issues they ask our Boss questions about some his proposals before they vote to support them. Another major difference between our board and the one in Greece is the fact that some of our members are longtime members and not three year wonders.

SCATS said...

To 11:30AM ~~ Dream on! This site has been the topic of Executive Sessions. It is watched by district office and various BOE members. It always has been. They need to know when the info gets leaked ;)

As for differences, most other districts actually provide TWO-WAY communication opportunities with residents & parents. Ours does not. Most other districts are somewhat more open & less paranoid that GCSD. But then few other districts have participated in the kinds of SCANDALS that GCSD has. Now there's a difference!

Anonymous said...

Yeah. Your right we do occasionally discuss your site in exec session . We are entitled to a few laughs while we eat our pizza.

SCATS said...

To 7:52AM ~~ Careful there, Sparky! If you choke on that taxpayer-funded pizza because of your laughter, don't expect the AED to work if you need reviving.

Sparky said...

Geeze SCATs as it is we don't get paid a dime to be a volunteer in this position, now you would deny us something to
eat on yours and my dime. How cheap can you be. As far as choking on our pizza goes, a couple of us one in particular knows how to apply the oppropriate method if needed so not to worry You have a better chance yourself of choking on a hair ball lmao

SCATS said...

To Sparky @2:04PM ~~ Would you REALLY want HIM to be able to hold it over you that he saved your life?? What if it meant mouth-to-mouth?? Death MIGHT be better!!

FYI - With the few coins leftover from my County Tax bill, I pay to have my fur coiffed, so no hairballs for me :)

Sparky said...

In the first place who ever you are referring to would not do that and even so I'd be be holding to him for saving my life without hesitation. In another circumstance a hair ball problem involving you might give rise to a cause to pause out of fear catching your affliction. In your case it may well be goodbye and a due my dear kitty lady for never no more shall we see you again.

Anonymous said...

Who owns the homes? Owners should be responsible, not banks.