Only two members of Union 26 were present last night
Last night was supposed to be a joint meeting of the Amherst Pelham Regional School Committee and Union 26, so with 100% attendance it would include 12 individuals.
But only seven bothered to show up for the Last Supper and another one -- Katherine Appy -- appeared via "remote participation" which means she does not count towards a quorum.
Since six of the seven were Regional School Committee members that constitutes a quorum for that body.
But Union 26 was not even close to a quorum (only 2 of 6). According to Debbie Westmoreland, assistant to the (now dethroned) Superintendent:
"Union 26 is made up of the three officers (chair, vice-chair and secretary) from the Amherst and Pelham School Committees, so it is currently Tara Luce, Darius Modestow and Trevor Baptiste for Pelham and Katherine Appy, Rick Hood and Phoebe Hazzard for Amherst."
While Rick Hood was in the room he is no longer a member of the Amherst School Committee so therefor cannot be a member of Union 26. Katherine Appy was using "remote participation" which state law says you do not count towards the quorum and Phoebe Hazzard and Tara Luce were MIA.
This HUGE oversight certainly demonstrates how the School Committees were distracted by their headlong rush to judgement.
Maria Geryk ARPS Superintendent contract by Larry Kelley on Scribd
Note her contract is signed by Union 26 and Regional SC Chairs
44 comments:
not to mention that the rules of meeting (ie failing to vote on calling the question, etc) were not followed. No wonder members were confused by what they were voting on. The chair did her best but she needs to brush up on the rules (clearly).
wait, do they have to vote again?
You've made a good point.
But it is hilarious when you refer to someone else's "headlong rush to judgment."
Rich Morse
Even a stopped clock ...
Laura Kent has no business acting as chair of the RSC. She has no prior experience serving on the school committee in any capacity, and therefore she has no history with Geryk or the other committee members. Kent's statement was clearly an apology and an admission that the RSC should take the blame for the fiasco (“This experience has put a mirror in front of our committee and made clear that we have a lot of work to do to minimize the risk of a similar situation in the future and to ensure the success of our future superintendents.") How dare she? Ms. Geryk's very public mishandling of numerous sensitive situations, her tendency to circle the wagons, deflect blame, and hide behind inept and expensive attorneys, not to mention her alienation of staff and families, should not be swept under the carpet. I am extremely disappointed in this outcome and question its legality. In any other employment situation, if a person wishes to end his/her contract and separate from a company voluntarily, s/he is not rewarded with a severance payout, let alone a 1.5 year payout! And to top it off, the evaluation process was completely circumvented, so the taxpayers will never have an opportunity for transparency. Foul!
CORRUPTION ALERT!!! APPY, KENT and others conspired with MARIA in a criminal conspiracy to threaten three elected school committee members to extort $300,000.00 dollars from the taxpayers. DEMOCRACY, USE IT OR LOSE IT!!!
I hope you are right Larry, as a re-vote would unleash a whole new wave of bad publicity over competence issues that will only further embarrass everyone involved. These "public servants" deserve the maximum embarrassment possible, as the cheap entertainment value of their humiliation is all that Amherst taxpayers will get for their 300 grand.
thanks for reposting Ms Geryk's contract. The language in the contract is very vague "The committees, individually and collectively, shall, in their discretion, refer all criticisms, complaints and suggestions called to their attention to the superintendent for study and recommendation. If the Committees do not bring such a criticism, complaint or suggestion to the Superintendent, then that criticism, complaint or suggestion may not be included in or referred to in the evaluation of the Superintendent." How, when, where are committee members supposed to refer 'refer all criticisms, complaints and suggestions'? In what venue? In what form? Ms Geryk made it clear multiple times to her SC members that their ONLY opportunity to provide evaluations (ie. complaints, criticisms, recommendations) was at the annual formal evaluation. She has essentially (attempted to) blocked any criticism outside that window. Given the (vague) language in her contract, it seems hard to imagine how any member's criticism could be seen as lawsuitable, as has implied by bloggers here and by SC members last night. Thoughts? Opinions?
Where in that contract does it say that she can terminate her contract and receive the remaining two years of her salary? The newspapers are reporting that she will be giving $310,000 + in cash.
So long, Ms. Geryk.
Now the haters can start sharpening their daggers for the next victim, whom they already despise without even knowing who it is.
Maybe Larry Kelley or Vira Douagmony or Trevor Baptiste should apply for this job, since they have all the right answers. It's an easy job and anyone should be able to do it. Right folks?
Come on now. Here's today's quiz: Name the last Superintendent of Schools you actually liked AND explain what s/he did that shows why we should agree with your assessment of that SI.
With a lot of that $310,000_ being tax-free. The $14,000 in FY-18 (July, 2018-June, 2019) for "health insurance" will not only be tax free but beyond her contracted end of employment.
At 11:06 AM I wrote that Ms Kent has no business chairing the RSC, and I want to amend/expand that statement. Foremost, I want to thank Ms. Kent and all of the members of the school committee (present & past) for their dedication and their time to serving, on a voluntary basis, the Amherst Pelham Regional School system. Regardless of whether I agree with the outcome, I know that the current school committee members and their predecessors have worked very hard under trying circumstances, on their own time, without compensation, and with a great deal of flak from the public. This is why it is so frustrating to see the "mirror" being turned back on the committee, without regard for the toll this debacle has surely taken on their lives. I doubt any member of the SC will walk away from this experience unscathed, and certainly there will be no parachutes for any of them. Perhaps if Ms. Kent had more direct experience working with Ms. Geryk, and more working history with her fellow committee members, she would understand that a mirror is an insufficient device for diagnosing the problems of the last several years.
With this entire episode, the school committee and admin team proves it would be highly irresponsible for us voters to approve the new school project tax override in November, and have these people be in charge of a $33 million+ very complex building project. Really, you expect voters to give you that authority? No way! You won't get a yes vote from me even though the project is needed. Simply because I have zero trust and -100% degree of confidence in the school comm and admin team to manage this project (really, you all will keep it within budget!? Ha!). Imagine also how many lawsuits will result from this team overseeing such a project: head contractor sues for defamation . . . and gets half a million payout; bricklayer says annual review not fair, threatens lawsuit . . . and gets $200,00 . . . on and on it goes.
To what was Trevor referring with his 'point of personal privilege' about being threatened and having his integrity impugned?
Maria thought Trevor and Vira were out to get her and the other 7 members of the RSC should have reigned them in. Thus leading to her emotional stress which she could sue all of them over.
So she should be paid $309K (or something like that).
I hope you are right Larry, as a re-vote would unleash a whole new wave of bad publicity over competence issues that will only further embarrass everyone involved.
It's not just the vote but the 3 hours of executive session that will have to be redone.
Above and beyond the fact that Laura Kent isn't the RSU chair and hence had.has no authority to call the ->RSU<- to order*, Kent took a roll-call vote to go into executive session. (State law requires her to do this.) At that point, she knew tAG will inevitably order the RSU to re[do everything after 5PM.hat she didn't have a quorum of the RSU and hence was obligated to adjourn the RSU meeting.
Remember that there are two concurrent meetings of two different bodies, each concurrently voting to go into executive session -- and the RSU did not lawfully do so. Hence, upon someone filing an OML complaint AGAINST THE RSU, the AG will require the RSU to re-do everything after 5PM.
This raises three other issues:
1: Quorum at the other exec sessions. There had to be a public roll-call vote to enter, and were there quorums of both bodies?
2: Laura Kent's inherent conflict of interest as being a dual co-chair. Think Obama addressing a Joint Session of Congress, with Biden & Ryan acting as co-chairs -- each body having one of their own serving as chair, hence co-chairs. Kent's duty is to her entity, the District, and hence the COI in chairing the RSU.
3: Are joint executive sessions even legal? I can't see how as the law specifies who may be present and "members of another school committee" aren't on the list.
QED the whole deal is illegal.
These "public servants" deserve the maximum embarrassment possible, as the cheap entertainment value of their humiliation is all that Amherst taxpayers will get for their 300 grand.
Wow! Talk about F**ked up mess!
Jere hochman was super cute and sexy.
I'm pretty sure the committee ruled that statement together that were released last night. And the school committee should take responsibility they haven't been supervising Maria they've been letting her be a supervisor that I've been letting her believe that they've been letting her being manipulated they need to stand up get it backbone and supervise like they're supposed to. This is not a reality TV show this is our children's education and yes they volunteer and they have a thankless job but the way the school committee has been being run by the superintendent for the last four years is disgusting so that's cool coming he does have some inward thinking to do and hopefully we can vote out some of these people that think they can bully people around and let the superintendent do as they please and get some people on there that don't mind supervising the superintendent and guiding our school budget and protecting our children. Sorry for all the run on sentences I am doing talk-to-text.
Trevor has been personally attacked by the current superintendent and her Entourage for a long time now. His statement refers to exactly what Whitney was referring to when she talked in Pelham. The superintendent bullying and emailing and bullying and manipulating people's lives. I think on the school committee they have something called personal privilege for any school Committee Member to use it it want it say something in the moment. I think it's just like a respect between all of them to give a Committee Member a chance to speak. And I'm not sure it may be a school Committee Member can actually answer what the definition of personal Privledge
Larry, what would be the process to change the current school committee/superintendent system? Is it state law or something we can do locally?
Vote for a new Mayor/Council where the Mayor is automatically Chair of the School Committee, like in Northampton.
following Ms Appy's call the question (and its second), a vote to 'call the question' should have immediately taken place. Instead, Trevor 'called a point of priveledge' (no idea what that means, never heard it used. Then it went straight to the vote to approve. Never a vote to end debate was taken, so I guess Trevor was right to step in if he still wanted to talk...what a shambles
@Dr. Ed- Darius Modestow (Pelham) is chair of the Union and he called the Union to order right after the region.
How was Trevor personally attacked?
WTF
A White Supt is going to sue White SC members for not silencing the two Minority SC members?
How do you think THAT would play in Boston?
I think it was the other way around.
Thought they were out to get her??
They were out to get her. PERIOD! And in the process Trevor violated her contract. Several times. Over and over again.
You want someone to blame for this mess? Look at Trevor and Vira. They are toxic. And they will continue to wreak havoc on the SC. Trevor is NOT a victim here.
BS! Trevor is not the victim! He is the cause of all this turmoil. He is the lone wolf on the SC who never knew his role as chair and violated the SI'S contract constantly.
@Dr. Ed- Darius Modestow (Pelham) is chair of the Union and he called the Union to order right after the region.
My bad - I stand corrected.
However, he didn't have a quorum and hence couldn't call his group to order.
At the very least, the roll call vote forced him to declare that he didn't have a quorum and thus adjourn his group.
Hence even if a joint exec session is even legal, last night's wasn't.
anon@3:32: please describe how Trevor violated Ms Geryk's contract "The committees, individually and collectively, shall, in their discretion, refer all criticisms, complaints and suggestions called to their attention to the superintendent for study and recommendation. If the Committees do not bring such a criticism, complaint or suggestion to the Superintendent, then that criticism, complaint or suggestion may not be included in or referred to in the evaluation of the Superintendent." Until you do, I with-hold judgement as should others...
Trevor violated her contract by evaluating her throughout the year, outside the evaluation protocol prescribed for her evaluation.
On "Point of privilege" -Robert's Rules- Point of Privilege: Pertains to noise, personal comfort, etc. - may interrupt only if necessary!
I believe Trevor's personal comfort was being attacked. He graciously stood his ground and spoke quite courageously. All this sidetracking over $$money$$ has taken the focus off the corruption, racism, classism that exudes in this system and is hurting our children. Maria's team aall need to be held accountable--Where were they? Where was she? How long can she hide? How much is the town willing to pay to escort her off school grounds? Such a f'n farce! The whole lot of the clowns and puppets--be it in central office or sitting behind those silver plated, name plates, on the school committee seats need a rude awakening. Don't you know Appy is best buddies with Maria--Maria was probably sitting right beside her during that whole 'remote' contact she had with sc! Re-vote--throw this idiotic, buddy up vote the f' out! Closing remark by Nick Yaffe (who by the way neglected to where his f'n clown tie last night) was enough to make the common person puke! Hey Nick--did you know Aisha could not go to your school either--or your playground over there in Wildwood--to play softball when her team met there? This all is so disgusting--somebody's got to be held accountable--better yet--somebody has got to realize the damage and irreparable harm this stay away order has created. And it is the whole f'n team in central office--right down to the human resource dictator.
I'd hate to even attempt to estimate the legal fees to straighten out this mess. The total will make the Wildwood School project look like Chump Change!
You people don't have a clue! Keep up the ranting and raving like lunatics. With each and every post our chances of finding another SI go down! But hey! We don't need a SI! We can just wing it. As a matter of fact let's get rid of ALL the administrators! Every last one! We don't need any of them! All we need are teachers who are free to run their classrooms any way they see fit! Fire every single administrator! ! Then we'll all be happy!
Those that fail to learn from their mistakes..are always doomed to repeat them..I for one-resent having to pay taxes for this pro-booster teacher union chauvinism..!!
You can send the bill directly to Trevor.
anon@4:41: I don't see that in her contract "The committees, individually and collectively, shall, in their discretion, refer all criticisms, complaints and suggestions called to their attention to the superintendent for study and recommendation. If the Committees do not bring such a criticism, complaint or suggestion to the Superintendent, then that criticism, complaint or suggestion may not be included in or referred to in the evaluation of the Superintendent." In fact it could be interpreted that the only way that riticisms, complaints and suggestions can be included in the annual eval is if it had been communicated to her previously. Where in her contract does the language support your view.
For two years (you) the people of Amherst let the SI do as she pleased. Now you all want blood. To late...your going to pay through your noses. And for a very long time.
A point of personal privilege is a response to "fighting words."
Col. Henry Roberts was a military officer in 19th Century San Francisco and post Civil-War, people were from EVERYWHERE and knew the rules of where they were from, and hence anarchy prevailed.
Instead of sorting out the mess, Roberts [an engineer] simply wrote his own, which were so popular he first published them in 1874. Now this was a time when everyone had a gun and meetings where many often weren't sober. People shooting each other was a real problem.
Hence a point of personal privilege was created as a safety valve, a non-violent way for a man to defend his honor.
Thid is the short version.
No Trevor himself has grounds to sue the district -- all he has to do is file an Ed-OCR complaint and you'll all be writing checks to him...
I wondered where ed was! He was off researching Roberts rules on Wikipedia!
Anon 5:03 Attacking Nick is reason 1a why we won't be able to attract anyone with a brain for the job. The dude is universally adored by students, parents, and staff. I thought his comments at the meeting were spot on. Your ad hominem rebuttal certainly has feeling.
As we move on, I wonder how as a community we can learn from this and look in the mirror at how we might change.
No 8:20, Dr. Ed was working.
I learned Robert's Rules long before Wikipedia even existed.
Post a Comment