Wednesday, May 11, 2016

Fallout Continues

Amherst Pelham Regional School Committee last night

The Amherst Pelham Regional School Committee went into executive session at the start of their regularly scheduled 6:00 PM meeting last night, presumably to discuss the situation surrounding embattled School Superintendent Maria Geryk who was present, as was an attorney from Gini Tate's law firm, Tom Colomb.

 Former Select Board member and retired teacher Judy Brooks asks about bullying programs

The agenda called for only one hour but the committee stayed in seclusion for twice that, coming back into open session at 8:14 PM.

The agenda also called for a discussion of "stay away orders" but that was put off to a later date.

 Patient audience who waited out the 2 hour executive session

The current controversy started when Maria Geryk issued a stay away order to single mom Aisha Hiza, banning her from all Regional school property for advocating on behalf of her bullied child who attends Pelham Elementary School.

The Pelham School Committee also went into executive session last week to discuss the matter.




40 comments:

Anonymous said...

Mike Long was not at the meeting last night. Neither did he accompany Maria Geryk to the Executive session. The male lawyer in the room was Tom Colomb from Gini Tate's law firm. Presumably he was there in her staid to attend the Executive session. He is the school committee's lawyer. He was introduced to the audience at the end of the regular SC meeting.

Anonymous said...

She was not banned "advocating on behalf of her bullied child". Perhaps if you reported instead of editorialized. Don't you consider yourself a reporter?

Sckened by admin in Pelham said...

Perhaps it would be better to say She was banned after getting frustrated and angry with the superintendent's office because AFTER 18 months of asking for help from the school system for her 7 year old things are still not better due to the crappy bullying program that is currently being used district wide.

Anonymous said...

Or maybe we could say frustrated single mom banned after asking for help for 18 months. After administrations lack of ability to handle bullying between first graders at PelhaM School victims parent has been attending school regularly to help dsughter through day because parents have lost faith school can provide a safe learning environment

Anonymous said...

Again we are only hearing one side of the story.

Sckened by admin in Pelham said...

It's funny how neither school committee got complaitaints info that was provided as requested.. Again manipulation .

Anonymous said...

You may be hearing only one side of the story, but so far the SC and Maria Geryk have
refused to explained why this parent has been banned. This is a sad testament for the Amherst School District and Maria G.

Anonymous said...

If Mike Long wasn't there in guessing the Executive session was not convened to talk about Ms Geryk. There is no way she would go into such a meeting without her lawyer. So presumably the Executive session was to discuss something else. Anyone have any ideas?

Anonymous said...

Re: Anon 9:59 - Exactly!

Anonymous said...

Geryk only attended the portion of the executive session that involved a non-union member's contract or something like that, first few minutes of the executive session. Then, Geryk left the executive session, and the SC talked about themselves for 1.75 hours, presumably, (since they couldn't have been talking about Geryk because she wasn't in the room nor was an attorney who represents her.) Geryk did not need a lawyer there, didn't even attend, must have been another person who needed a lawyer present.

Anonymous said...

When I see a former school admin, from years ago, who doesn't live or work in Amherst anymore, come to Amherst SC to support a former teacher, who hasn't lived or worked in Amherst for years, and who came to "sound the alarm bell" for us residents who actually live here and send our kids to school here, about how terrible our schools are, I feel like we dodged a couple of bullets with them and that it was probably a good thing they got canned. Hayes was a totally unpopular MS admin, and he had to leave. What gall!

Dr. Ed said...

"Again we are only hearing one side of the story."

Yes, Maria Geryk's side.

And the fact she remains implies that all hope for civility is lost. Parents, it's time for "pitchforks & torches" or at least to found "Justice for Aisha."

Bluntly, it's time for the tactics employed by the "Justice for Jason" cadre -- to hold protest marches outside Geryk's office (and perhaps home), to falsely accuse her of anything & everything imaginable, perhaps even have a rally outside the DESE building in Malden.

The latter likely would be quite effective -- likewise a protest in front of the State House in Boston. The media would cover either, anything involving the 413 Area Code inherently is considered "Man Bites Dog" as they consider Framingham to be in Western Massachusetts and anything beyond Worcester to be "on the NY Border."
Even a protest in front of the regional DCF office would be effective.

But it's time to stop caring about anything other than "GEYRK'S GOTTA GO!"

Anonymous said...

Time for a complaint to the Bar Assn about Tate?

She technically works for the school committees, not Geryk.

Dr. Ed said...

An aside: The infamous ("racist") "It looks like a drug deal" line was initially uttered by a BLACK UMPD Officer. That was overlooked...

Anonymous said...

Neither the SC or Ms Geryk are at liberty to explain why she was banned. This is because of laws around confidentiality. If the mother signed a release then Ms Geryk would be free to discuss the issue with the public.

Anonymous said...

Tom Colomb was at the meeting last night in his role as the SC lawyer. He does not represent Ms Geryk.

Anonymous said...

Has the SC or the Chair responded in any way to the many charges and claims contained in Atty. Long's response letter to Trevor? Or are they just going to ignore that, hope that stuff disappears: "Look, I'm sorry I hit you again, can we please just go to the party and act like we get along"? It appears they had almost two hours inn exec. session to discuss the matter with an attorney in the room, it appears Geryk was NOT in the room, and seemingly with no response to the serious charges and threats of litigation against The Town, The Amherst-Pelham Regional School District, and individual members of the Committee? Weird. Seems dangerous and risky.

Anonymous said...

We never found out: did Trevor send the "cease and desist" letter to Geryk's attorney with the knowledge and support of the board (SC) he sent the letter on behalf of, or did he send it himself, as an individual, with no other board sanction?

Anonymous said...

"Time for a complaint to the Bar Assn about Tate?"



Why ask?




Anonymous said...

"Neither the SC or Ms Geryk are at liberty to explain why she was banned. This is because of laws around confidentiality. If the mother signed a release then Ms Geryk would be free to discuss the issue with the public."

All we ask is for them to let Aisha know, address it with her and her representatives and resolve it!

March 15th was almost two months ago!

Anonymous said...

Atty. Long's letter seemed to indicate that he acted individually and that the rest of the SC did not sanction his response. If that is indeed the case I can imagine the SC might want to chat with Trevor about it for a bit.

Anonymous said...

How do we know that the administration has not given Aisha the answers already. Perhaps she has the answers she seeks but she does not like the answer. We really don't know.

Anonymous said...

So, we don't know at all why the SC was in Executive Session, but we do know that it could be for any number of reasons. Yet many of us here are more than willing to speculate and chase Kelly's seeds of condemnation. Apparently we are too impatient to wait for the truth.

We also know ,if we have tried to read anything about the Pelham situation, that Geryk has said she is quite willing to release all information about this when the mother involved signs a release. She has yet to sign that release. I wonder why some of us here aren't as willing to speculate about that? What is the mother hiding? Oh, I'll bet you'd speculate if Geryk released the information and the woman sued the school district for releasing personal information.

Maybe Kelly should rename his blog, "Axe to Grind." Or maybe, "Caution, Very Shallow Thinking Pool."

But go ahead and speculate. But when you see that ladder ahead you may want to climb out of the mud.

Anonymous said...

Considering that Ms Tates letter went out without consulting the Pelham school committee I highly doubt Trevor would have done the same thing to the regional school committee that was done to him

Anonymous said...

Ed are you a homebound person?....you seem like maybe you don't get out much with your pitchforks and torches....

Dr. Ed said...

I think that Aisha should publicly demand that Maria sign a release of confidentiality, and then play the same game when she doesn't.

Anonymous said...

Ed, as usual, that doesn't even make sense. Ms. Hiza already my release whatever documents about this that she wants to. She's just chosen not to.

Dr. Ed said...

Bullshite.

Maria & Minions have smeared Hiza and now seem to somehow feel entitled to demand she waive her right to hold them accountable for having done so. She already HAS released the documents, Geryk appears to be demanding a blanket release from liability for defaming Hiza.

The question I have is what is Maria Geryk hiding?!?!?!?!?

Is Team Maria attempting to cover up it's own incompetence? It's own bullying of parents? It's own failure to not only address bullying but it's failure to comply with state & Federal anti-bulling mandates? Or could they really be so petty that they want to silence any & all critical voices?

Maria's Minions have already smeared Hiza, publicly-but-anonymously accusing her of threatening to murder the Principal at her South Hadley residence. OK, if such a threat was actually made, if there is a rational fear for the physical safety of Ms. Desjarlais (at her residence in South Hadley), how exactly does banning Ms. Hiza from a property three towns away protect Ms. Desjarlais?

Likewise, if there is a realistic fear that Aisha Hiza is going to shoot someone (Lisa Desjarlais?), exactly how does banning her from school property prevent her from firing the weapon from the far side of the property line? It isn't like there isn't a public road on two sides of the school, she wouldn't even have to get out of her car...

And, ummm, isn't murder a somewhat more serious offense than trespassing? Hence, ummm, if you have a rational basis for believing that someone is going to walk into a school and start shooting people, ought you not do something that might prevent this from happening? Something involving, say, the police and the courts, something more than just saying "private property, keep out"?

This is wht Maria's in the wrong either way. Regardless of what Hiza did or didn't do, Geryk screwed up. it is Geryk who needs to waive confidentiality.

Dr. Ed said...

One more thing:

Ms. Desjarlais holds Massachusetts certification in the areas of Elementary Principal, Elementary K-6, and Special Education. Prior to working in the field of education, she worked for ten years in the mental health field.

Lisa Desjarlais may be the nicest and most professional principal on the planet -- I've never met her. However there is a certain "client" mindset that is pandemic to those who work in the mental health field, a certain sense of arrogance that comes from having absolute power over other people and the fact that "absolute power corrupts absolutely."

What they are trained to do is not see clients as sentient beings -- human beings entitled to free will -- but instead some lesser being which they have every right to manipulate ans control for the being's own good. They see themselves as always being in the right and anyone who disagrees with them only does so because of mental illness.

In the mental health field, this well may be the case -- but the problem arises when they take this mindset out of the field and start interacting with people who aren't mentally ill, people who merely disagree with them. The Puritans were the same way.

Anyone who does so they define as "Mentally Ill" in much the manner that the Puritans defined Demonic Possession -- and in either case, it is impossible to prove otherwise which is why the burden of proof should be on the one making the accusation and not the one accused (as it is).

History teaches us that it is a very dangerous thing to consider people less than human -- I like to remind people how the Holocaust started and which category of people the National Socialists killed first (it wasn't the Jews).

In this country, look at how we treated the Native Americans -- kidnapping their children and forcing them to live in an European fashion "for their own good." Etc...

Just Sayin....

Sckened by admin in Pelham said...

The supposed threat info which wasn't an actual threat came from a disgruntled ex who has an agenda. Saying Im reporting ypu to Doe, Nd being a lawyer so maybe you better watch your back is not a physcal threat it is a legal one. Again all documentation regarding conversations between this,person and Aisha are documented through family wizard have been provided to Chestnut street but have been ignored. This ex has an agenda and using this situation to further his means. Please keep in mind that preceptiom is key here if Lisa felt physically threatened a person can't tell her she was wrong for her feelings. Just as Aisha feels ignored, bullied. No one can refute how she feels. I have had conversations with Lisa and I don't think she feels threatened I think she wants this over

Anonymous said...

Ed...where do you find the time? How many people do you think read your nonsense?

Anonymous said...

If the mom would just sign the release then this could all be cleared up and we could all know both sides of the story. At this point one side can say anything and there is no way to know if it's true.
Pretty clever if you are trying to create something.

Anonymous said...

How about Maria signs a release?

Anonymous said...

What would Maria sign a release for? All the information the administration has about the situation and the behavior that led to the stay away order can't be released unless the mother allows it to be.
It's really starting to look like the mom is hiding something. Otherwise why not let all the information out?

Anonymous said...

Maria could sign a release for all of the things discussed about her in ec=xecutive session, it really looks like SHE is hiding something.

Anonymous said...

Not true. Pelham executive committee meeting was about Aisha's complaint. Nothing about that session can be released.

Anonymous said...

Seems to me that Maria & Minions screwed up quite badly and now are trying to justify the destruction of a woman's reputation.

SUE AISHA, SUE!!!

Sckened by admin in Pelham said...

Yes she is but not for the money as much as the resignations..

Anonymous said...

Nothing on the record.. Im just saying How else did WE #teamraheli find out none of the information they had to consider came from the complaint.

Anonymous said...

When she is told to only give documents to Ms Tate for the executive session and to only communicate with Ms Tate and both Aisha and her lawyer call seversl times to give Ms Tate documents and she never calls either back..thats problem with the process..why shpuld anything in those records be accurate after the dirty games the admin is plAying