Former Superintendent Maria Geryk getting a $309,000 buyout
Region and Union 26
Once again Pelham school committee representative Trevor Baptiste put up a stink about proceedings, this time concerning Union 26 taking a revote/do over on Maria Geryk's $309,000 buyout package, after he questioned if Union 26 is even a legal entity.
Trevor Baptiste, former Chair of the Region
Union 26 (Amherst & Pelham SC members) revote Maria Geryk $309K buyout
Last week they voted in favor of the contract but did not have a legal quorum.
So after 10 minutes of bickering they came to a 4-1 affirmative vote (one member, Chair Tara Luce, had recused herself). Last week the Amherst Pelham Regional School Committee voted 4-3 in favor of the buyout.
So now, theoretically, it's a done deal.
Except RSC member Vira Douangmany Cage is asking the Attorney General to investigate the matter. And/or it only takes 10 teed-off taxpayers to file a class action lawsuit in Hampshire Superior Court
.
Mike Morris appointed acting Superintendent
The Amherst Pelham Regional School Committee then went into executive session to negotiate a contract with Mike Morris to become Acting Superintendent, and to approve the executive session minutes over the past four sessions amounting to just over 11 hours of secret meetings.
Chair Laura Kent said it would be 45 minutes. The Committee finally came back into public session around 9:15 PM -- after THREE HOURS -- but said they would not release the executive session minutes tonight.
Audience at 6:15 when RSC went into executive session
265 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 265 of 265The SI's evaluation process provides for a mid - year review. I think that occurred in January 2016 but I might be wrong on the date. You may not like the evaluation process but everyone on the SC is aware of the process and the consequences for knowingly ignoring the process.
Kurt at 2:21 you repaired my bike perfectly!
A part of this mess has to be attributed to this blog allowing anonymous comments. Where else in Amherst society can people make anonymous comments that are published for the world. Think what a different place Amherst discourse would be if this blog only allowed signed comments like other news sources. Larry says its for free speech, it also about creating a circus that bringing clicks and thus dollars into Larry's pocket and allows Larry's world view to focus and frame the issues facing the town. Readers have given him power here and thus he and us are responsible for part of this mess now and the legacy we are asking some brave soul to step into. How does this conversation improve teaching and learning?
To Anon 7:06 I think many "wounds are festering" in Amherst partially due to not having any forum where people are "allowed" to say exactly what they think, or express views that are not considered "Politically Correct." Larry does us all a great "free speech" service by allowing most anyone to say what they are thinking, anonymously. Readers can always choose to skip over or ignore those comments that offend or are not their "favorite flavor." It is important to get many points of view.
Other news sources are "tilting" their news in the direction they like. We are not getting all the information we need to hear or read, to make well-informed decisions.
Thanks, Larry. Keep the comments open.
The demand letter shpukd be shared In Entirety as Rick says. TrAnsparency is the only way everyone can move forwarx we bought that demand letter it cost our kids 309000...
So... your statement would have a heck of a lot more credibility if you weren't posting anonymously. Not ready to step into the spotlight? Then don't expect me to, either.
And I'm grateful to Larry's blog for providing a venue for discourse, particularly in this case where certain institutional representatives did everything in their power to silence and suppress critique.
She knew her vote would make no difference. Trevor also voted no because he felt the process was backwards and then wanted the evaluations finished before talking about contract negotiations about Maria. They both knew where the school committee was standing are on buying her out they just spent 14 hours talking about it. So their votes were more to make a statement but they weren't supporting buying a woman out of her contract that quit.
Vera also said in those meeting notes well let's let her work out a contract if she's not going to negotiate just make her work. And I'm sure that statement will be in the notes when they are released and we can actually all read every word of them. Remember reporters choose what to put in their articles and they don't put everything in although I do think Scott did a great job on the article in general. I wish that the editor hadn't put Trevor's picture next to Maria like it was Trevor vs. Maria because it wasn't they could have just as easily put Steve Sullivan's picture there. Steve also voted no so why did they choose to put Trevor there because he's black? Because for the last year or two years what is look like Trevor Has Maria have had this childish preschool fight and a sandbox? Again putting Trevor next to Maria just puts more pressure on their family and reminds his wife who is already very upset by the situation in a bad place.
If Maria has such a strong case why did she come down from 600000 to 300000?
You are correct about this
As a citizen wbo stood up for Aisha I need to say Maria's husband tried unsuccessfully to bully and manipulate my life and business. It has been proven in these posts which is exactly what has happened to multiple achool commitee members over the past 6 years. Anyone who on SC who attempted fo shpervise the super who didnt agree with the super had their life fu***d with. I am juat fortunate that Kurt and Maria's minions have no bearing on my future. However the list is exhaustive of SC members that have been disparaged, trashed, threatened and made to look like they have an agenda. I do feel special to be part of this group as an average citizen.
She also stated lets just keep her. If she wants more than we can afford, lets not give her 1 penny.
A lot has happened this last year that we as a community needs to digest. We need to stylishly read the evals, and exec session minutes and use c then to decide who based on our own opinions we want to represent us. The school committee needs to do some individual introspection and come together as a team to choose our interim & permanent supers. They need to remind themselves they are there to supervise the super. They need to work together for the best interests of our children. All discourse should remain unseen. Personal attacks of our volunteers should not happen. Disagree fine..call them out on bad behavior fine. Vote them out even better. Just don't be a compkainer and then not use your constutional duty and vote them out at the end of their term or vote then in again. If a SC member is not acting in the community's best interest get rid of them.
anon 2:21: you're upset the people stood up to an overpaid incompetent school administrator? that used to be a good thing. you must be a clinton supporter.
After reading through the evals one glaring statement stuck out to me that sums up Marias and the SC backwarfs relationship. This is from Dan Robb's eval. "While there are artifacts and data points provided by the Superintendent that would seem to support a higher rating,
there is in fact limited transparency in the process by which the School Committee is able to assess whether these
standards are being met. We are not able to talk with educators and administrators without permission, and certainly not
within an atmosphere of candor, trust, and transparency about how instructional leadership is practiced within the
schools. The administrative atmosphere within which the School Committee is asked to operate obviates the possibility
for a full and frank assessment of this criterium. In my opinion, the policy forbidding School Committee members from
consulting at will with staff and faculty in the schools must change, as at present we are only able to assess the
condition of the schools through information provided by the Superintendent, or with her permission" How can that policy create an environment where the SC can do what they were voted in to do ?
I'm just trying to understand what happened here. I don't see where Trevor and Vira were toxic, defaming, or inflammatory. Can you tell me specifically, not in board general terms, but specifically where and when they were these things? They spoke up yes, good for them, otherwise I just don't see what they did wrong.
The 'breach of contract' that led to the $309k Maria G payout stemmed from SC members not cutting-n-pasting their comments into the Section 20 summary on a Survey Monkey form? Really? That rises to the level of a $309k payout?
Thomas Colomb and his law firm has represented Maria G's in the past. In what capacity was he giving advice to the SC on this matter in those executive session meetings? There seems to be some real confusion here. Was he acting as Maria G's advocate? Will his firm get a cut of the $309k as a fee? Standard 15%? We (and the SC) should have been clear on this point.
Congress and US citizens are free anytime to criticize the President. The state legislature and residents of Massachusetts are free to criticize the governor. But the school superintendent in Amherst is in a special category that can only be criticized through an opaque Kafkaesque process designed to protect the superintendent over all other concerns. How can that be?
I asked some lawyer friends of mine about how serious Maria G's lawsuit threat could be. They said it sounded like they were just throwing everything at the wall here (contract/constitutional claims/defamation/ethics/emotional distress) in a way to cause fear, uncertainly and doubt to those not familiar with the law, and that such a case for a public figure would have zero merit and would likely be dismissed out of hand.
Yeah, with Katherine Appy and her friends guarding the Amherst schools hen house I feel so much better.
Also: thanks to Larry Kelley for providing this important open forum, and reading documents on scribd really sinks, just link to the PFD already.
A part of this mess has to be attributed to this blog allowing anonymous comments. Where else in Amherst society can people make anonymous comments that are published for the world.
The Federalist Papers were published anonymously.
Yes, some 228 years later, scholars have pretty much figured out who wrote each one, but no one knew at the time.
Great works of literature have bee published anonymously -- Mark Twain's name wasn't Mark Twain and I believe it was Mary Shelly who initially wrote under a fake male name due to 19th Century sexism, I know someone did.
And Larry, I'm not sure that all of Miss Emily's works were initially published with her name attached, I know that "It Was The Night Before Christmas" wasn't -- it was written by a MINISTER....
"Think what a different place Amherst discourse would be if this blog only allowed signed comments like other news sources."
Yes, it would more closely resemble North Korea than it already does.
Larry says its for free speech, it also about creating a circus that bringing clicks and thus dollars into Larry's pocket '
He's producing a product that people value, why shouldn't he make money on it? And if he is, why is he attacked for not having a job?
"and allows Larry's world view to focus and frame the issues facing the town."
As opposed to, well, whom?
"Readers have given him power here and thus he and us are responsible for part of this mess now and the legacy we are asking some brave soul to step into."
I think John Milton's _Areopagitica_ -- his 1644 speech to the British Parliament supporting unlicensed publishing -- is the best response to this.
My favorite part:
"Though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously, by licensing and prohibiting, to misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse, in a free and open encounter?"
How does this conversation improve teaching and learning?
How did Queen Maria's Contract do this?
Even better:
"When school children start paying union dues, that’s when I’ll start representing the interests of children." -- Al Shanker, American Federation of Teachers.
Teaching & learning are being held hostage by a corrupt oligarchy and that is not right.
Anon 8:41 pm:
You are not alone in having been harassed by Kurt Geryk because of something they questioned about our schools or with his wife's leadership. I know numerous other Amherst residents and some employees of local newspapers who are not SC members who have had the same experience. In some of these cases, he has backed off only after the recipient of this harassment said that they would contact the police. Some of these incidents have been reported on this blog. Many others have not. If we are going to be hearing the superintendent's complaints about the district and her grounds for a lawsuit, perhaps these incidents of harassment should be revisited as well. Yes, she is not her spouse and not responsible for his actions. But these incidents have contributed to a climate where discourse and criticism of our schools is publicly stifled and people are afraid to speak out, even with this mildest of criticisms. One reason that this blog's school posts get so many comments is that this is one of the few current safe venues parents and community members have to make their concerns heard. A few minutes at the beginning of a SC meeting is not the same, and not the sufficient.
:Yes, she is not her spouse and not responsible for his actions."
I'm not so sure -- the RICO statutes were explicitly intended to address the actions of family members.
Anon 1127
No the breach of contract is not because people did not cut and paste properly. The contract has been breached over the last 2 years repeatedly on several occasions. She was defamed by SC members over the last few years.
Further Mr Colomb represented the SC. Mr. Long is MA Geryk ' s lawyer. Additionally please note that one of the members of the SC is a lawyer. She certainly would know if the claims were creditable and the district was at risk of incurring greater costs if the SC did not settle with Ms. Geryk.
The responsibility for this mess does not lie with Ms. Geryk. It lies with those SC members who knowingly violated her contract without caring how their actions put the district at risk. They showed little regard for the students who are supposed to be their highest priority.
..."the policy forbidding School Committee members from consulting at will with staff and faculty in the schools must change, as at present we are only able to assess the condition of the schools through information provided by the Superintendent, or with her permission..."
Again: WhiskeTangoFoxtrot!
1: I would have rated her 0 -- not even 1 but 0 -- on absolutely everything on the same grounds as a student who wouldn't turn in his/her/its work. In both cases the argument would be "I'm perfect unless you can document that I'm not", and I've had students try to play that game with me ... and it didn't work.
What do you think an auditor -- any auditor -- would say if you wouldn't let him/her/it look at your books? What would the IRS say? M presumption regarding Maria would be the same, I wouldn't have bothered to try to evaluate her == Oi'd just have flunked her.
2: The DESE Regs presume informal unannounced observations. There are explicit references to this ("e.g. "no matter how brief") in the Regs. If com[lying with DESDoes the censorship go the other way as well? E Regs is an important part of her evaluation, she;s precluded this from happening.
3: Does "the policy forbidding School Committee members from
consulting at will with staff and faculty" go the other way as well? Are off-duty public employees being prevented from talking to SC members? THAT'S ILLEGAL!
3A: In addition to the First Amendment issues, if a school employee who lives in the district (some do) is being prevented from speaking with his/her/its elected representatives, that's a big time 14th Amd Voting Rights issue -- is that what Trevor's reference to the 14th Amendment is all about?
3B: Notwithstanding everything elae, if school employees are prohibited from speaking with SC members, Tara Luce inherently is n violation of that, which rises 14th Amd "equal protection" issues.
4: whistleblower law says you gotta go to management first, but if you aren't allowed to, you can go to the press with total impunity.
Kurt, can you say "A R B I T R A T I O N"?
C"ongress and US citizens are free anytime to criticize the President. The state legislature and residents of Massachusetts are free to criticize the governor."
We're free to do a LOT more than that, we can ridicule them and often do. Obama, Bush, Cheney, Biden -- the pundits & cartoonists have been vicious, e.g. "Joe 'Bite Me'" for Biden. This goes all the way back to the Zanger case.
"I asked some lawyer friends of mine about how serious Maria G's lawsuit threat could be. They said it sounded like they were just throwing everything at the wall here (contract/constitutional claims/defamation/ethics/emotional distress) in a way to cause fear, uncertainly and doubt to those not familiar with the law, and that such a case for a public figure would have zero merit and would likely be dismissed out of hand.'
Show them the arbitration clause and then see what they say...
I know being a public servant is super hard but if you look at the minutes the day the email was presented to the school committee Miss Dolven wasnt there. My understanding after reading the minutes posted that Miss Dolven then voted for the buyout even though she had never read the email which I think is significant especially since she is the one on the school committee with the most legal background. So she was never able to give her legal advice to the school committee about what that email meant. Even though I'm not really sure her area of expertise is educational law. It probably isn't because I think I've heard her say that previous school committee meetings. But having someone with legal experience on the school committee itself was a definite plus. But now the rumor is that she quit the other night after the 11 o'clock hour push to get the executive session minutes approved. I feel very bad for her that this whole situation has taken up so much of your time she seem like she was a good representative for Leverett. However I don't really think any school committee member that didn't read that email directly shouldn't have been able to vote in the buyout. I want to read that email myself but the way it's been portrayed I think it's an integral part of the decision-making process in the whole situation
This responsibility lies with Maria since in almost every single one of her evaluations everyone put that she cannot deal with conflict. This has been an ongoing issue. Maria has some thinking to do. She has to deal with conflict or she has to change professions . As the top person you're always the person who is at fault whether it was you or not! It's your responsibility to fix it not hide your office. Maria needs to manage conflict better and none of this would have happened. If she was able to do that she wouldn't have had school committee members upset with her, she wouldnt have ended up in the Civil Right lawsuit in Pelham, she wouldn't have ended up with Carolyn Gardner going to court, she wouldn't have upset Dylans father so badly, Middle School teachers wouldn't be upset, the parents from Fort River and Pelham Over The Bullying wouldn't be so upset! it is all there in the evaluations and there are examples: She shuts down, She cannot deal with conflict, She has to be in control. Everutthimg is everyone else's fault. I can almost understand why because Kurt seems to function on conflict! He probably is a bear to live with at home and she probably just shuts down not to have to deal with him. That's how she deals with her professional life but I don't have my PhD in Psychology.
Thank you for saying that I really appreciate you bringing that to me. I'm just thankful that Kurt really can't hurt me. That's only because I'm fortunate I can't imagine what he's done to other people I did bring my concerns to the chief of police when I told him what happened and the accusations he just started laughing. People from.here or who.have been here for 35 yrs have known me my whole life. So no crazy accusations will affect me but like I said I'm just fortunate I know there's other people that don't have that same long-standing relationship with people that I do
What's with Kurt? Why do so many fear him? Where does he work? Is he thinking he is justified in defending his wife? Help us understand.
I'm sure he feels Justified. And I know Maria loves children but just because you love children doesn't make you qualified to be a superintendent managing conflict as mentioned above makes you qualified to be a superintendent. She's done a great job on the budget. Except for in Pelham the legal fees in Pelham along with the buyout is going to leave us one last pair or a half a pair of this year we have no reserves in Pelham it was even said so by Sean? When I watched it on TV I'm not sure what's going to happen next year. I think that Maria needed to focus on the basics and not worry about the huge bigger pictures that were Beyond her grasp for fixing. In a way I respect her for laying it on the line too defend his wife I would have a hell of a lot more respect for him if he didn't try to ruin other people's lives and he actually put his name on his post although we absolutely know it's him whenever I call him out he never responds. And I would love to put my name on this post and I totally respect Katrina and others that are able to do it I'm just not right now in a place where I can afford to have Kurt or appy mess with my life
Hopefully Kurt and Maria will move away soon. It's like an old western movie where one outlaw has the whole town afraid until a new marshall comes to town.
why are people so afraid of Kurt?
Because he is a demon that spreads lies and makes people look crazy. Or he says something about your business like he did to Rebecca that he would never go to Sunset Grill. Or when he called for with Nina a boycott of all the Town businesses that support Larry's blog. He has started this anti campaign against Vera on this blog. He is constantly saying things on this blog like Vera and Trevor are toxic. And we know it's him. He was a big part of the smear campaign against Catherine Sanderson Shabazz Trevor. He does things that affect people's lives their livelihood and is just downright mean
The minutes and evaluations at gazettenet are revealing. Out of many noteworthy revelations, two things especially stood out that the School Committee should bear in mind for the next superintendent's contract and the operation of the central office:
1. Geryk's contract prohibited School Committee members from talking independently with teachers, administrators, or staff. That should be changed if at all possible. And if it can't be changed, that's beyond ridiculous. Yes, of course there are ways around that stipulation, but not without putting people in a compromising position. The superintendent reports to the SC. The SC should not give that kind of power to any superintendent. That's one of the reasons we're in this mess.
2. For the meeting where Finance Director Sean Mangano provided data to the SC, it was actually Human Resources Director Kathy Mazur who investigated and presented majority of the requested financial info to the SC. The head of HR should not be doing that work. If memory serves, Mangano reported to Mazur before he got the Financial Director job.
The Karma train's a'comin fer ol' Kurt, iffin' it ain't already here.
This is the part of the contract that matters, evaluation-wise:
“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. The Superintendent or her designee will attend all Committees meetings and all Committees and citizen Committee meetings relating to school matters and serve as a non-voting ex-officio member of all Committees.”
The part I put in bold may be where the problem is.
That does not mean criticism cannot happen outside of formal evaluation. It sort of means the other way around, that if a specific criticism was mentioned ONLY in the formal evaluation, that it can't be used. That sort of makes sense, because you should not wait until an evaluation to bring things to the attention of the Superintendent.
It sure would be nice to find out what the specific claims were. I hope we get a copy of that letter that was issued then taken back.
Me too.
But at this point I can't even get them to give me the "amended" executive session minutes that they voted to release last week.
Rick, you were ON the SC! Ms Geryk TOLD committee members that the ONLY time they could 'evaluate' her was at her yearly formal review. Evaluate means 'criticisms, complaints and suggestions'. Are you denying this she did that? (It is captured on ACTV video). She cannot have it both ways (unless she is duplicitous). I think this would have quickly squashed any legal case from her.
I didn't say anything about what she said or did not say. I was referring to what is in the contract.
There is a difference between "criticisms, complaints and suggestions" and "evaluation". I certainly referred "criticisms, complaints and suggestions" to her on many occasions (some of them my own), and doing so is not "evaluative".
If things were mentioned to Maria/ any super then unless there is a papertrail like email then how is it proven. Just curious hiw these issues or concerns get mentioned.
Rick you are part of the Problem! And here you are acting so innocent and trying to understand the contract. I don't know how any of you SC members, including past members, can show your faces around town. You took an unqualified candidate, gave her maximum money and a way too powerful a CONTRACT. What was the SC getting... free tire inflation from Kurt? The whole SC from the past should be Sued! But not you rick...you stood up to Maria!
Rebecca please read this and translate.
Rebecca, I'm seeing reference to TWO Pelham lawsuits, and I don't know if that includes Aisha's suit.
For the meeting where Finance Director Sean Mangano provided data to the SC, it was actually Human Resources Director Kathy Mazur who investigated and presented majority of the requested financial info to the SC. The head of HR should not be doing that work. If memory serves, Mangano reported to Mazur before he got the Financial Director job.
1: That presentation was an OML violation. They should either have gone into public session to hear this, or had their Supt make the presentation. Maybe, the latter may be a violation of the new OML.
2: ONLY SC members could be present in the closed session. Hence ANOTHER (different) OML violation for these two non-members to be present in EC.
3: Mazur was present at THREE of these exec sessions. She took notes at the first one (notes the Gazette doesn't have on their website), she was at this one, and she was voted out of a third by Vera's motion. And a non-member, not even allowed to be present, can't be the official recorder. THREE MORE OML VIOLATIONS
4: "If memory serves, Mangano reported to Mazur before he got the Financial Director job." -- when Queen Maria fired what's-his-name. Perhaps we should now find out what happened there...
5" The model I've always seen is a business manager eho supervises the HR person, but as Amhersr is ass-backwards. Does Mangano have a CPA? He SHOULD...
Who is this Mazur woman and why does she seem to be in the middle of everything?
Eebecca 9:10 translated:
"Minutes should be released immediately because public needs closure and SC needs to regain the confidence of the residents. Unless [Geryk] is suing, there is no reason not to release them. A pending lawsuit is why Pelham folk can't get the minutes of a May exex session."
She's right which is why I cleaned up her grammar -- although I've seen a lot worse from some k-12 teachers, a LOT worse.
However badly needed, there isn't going to be closure, though. Even if there isn't a massive underlying criminal conspiracy, even if there weren't major lawsuits looming in the wreckage of Maria's Mess, she should not be permitted to disappear like a thief into the night
It's like spraying a hornets nest, if it's a big one and you don't remove it, they'll just come back. From what I can see, there's a nest of vipers on Chestnut street that needs to be cleaned out.
But at this point I can't even get them to give me the "amended" executive session minutes that they voted to release last week.
That's a denial of a Sunshine Request, file an appeal with the AGO. You can always withdraw if/when they give you the document.
Larry, if the AGO's office gets buried in ARSD paperwork, they might wake up and ask some badly needed questions.
Yes the difference is Kathleen is friends with and likes the superintendent as a person and Vera is critical of the superintendent so there is this disparity
What? Come on SC the public has the right to know! We need closure and you all need to restore faith for the residents of these towns. There is only one reason I can think of they wouldn't be released.. LAWFUL PURPORSES.. meaning someone is suing. Which is why we can't get the May minutes from the Pelham exec session. Ty edited.
When it looks like a rat, feels like a rat and smells like a rat, it probably is a rat! better luck in future clandestine gerykgate endeavors...not.
To Ed @12:44
Kathy Mazur is the not only "the straw that stirs the drink" at the central office, she's also the bartender, the bouncer, and the manager. An old hand whose title belies her influence.
anon@8:10 has it right. Ms Geryk had backup (or was it puppetmaster, hard to know)...hope retirement is around the corner
So even though Dan Robb did nothing wrong he was named as one of the people that Maria was going to sue for violating her contract.
Probablly the other one rumor is has to do with a teacher and treatment of a student. I am not 100% on this.
I'm still waiting to see who she throws under the bus
Ty Ed talk to text is terrible.
Puppetmaster is a good descriptor. The central office is stacked with Geryk/Mazur hires - including acting superintendent Mike Morris. Do not be surprised when you start to hear and see support for him to get the permanent position. All the "right" things will be said: home grown in that he's the well-liked former principal of Crocker Farm, promoted to central office and thrived in upper-middle then upper management, knows Amherst and the district, has good working relationships, good listener...
Mazur wants Morris or another internal candidate (deities forbid Mark Jackson) so she can cruise into retirement with as little drama as possible. The Rodriguez mirror was way too much for her. No chance she risks something like that again.
Thing is, the School Committee members know all of this. Question is, which ones are willing to do anything about it. And how.
Clandestine posts are from Trevor and his wife.
No way Morris takes this job...... he saw first hand what this town and blog does. He has kids in the schools and lives here. He'll get one of the surrounding jobs and be happy he won't suffer the same fate as Maria.
for you folks still talking about maria's contract clause that doesn't allow sc members to evaluate the superintendent without her permission, the foolish clause is null and void (like maria's contract) because attorney tate already lost the argument supporting the foolish clause in the ma supreme judicial court. the highest court in the state ruled that sc members are required to evaluate the super in open session before maybe going into executive session to discuss contract issues not extortion threats. the ag's office is going to rule that the sc intentionally violated the open meeting law and stuck their fingers in the eye of the highest court in the state!
"To Ed @12:44
Kathy Mazur is the not only "the straw that stirs the drink" at the central office, she's also the bartender, the bouncer, and the manager. An old hand whose title belies her influence."
And Geryk fit ~beautifully~ into THAT matrix.
-Squeaky Squeaks
p.s. Shoulda cleaned house Maria. Shoulda--cleaned--house...
Maybe Mazur needs a buyout.
The FBI cleaned up their Boston office by cleaning it out. After arresting the crooked guys, I'm told that everyone else was given the option of either transferring somewhere else or leaving the Bureau. When UM has a problematic dorm (e.g. Butterfield circa 2000), they move everyone out of it and start with a completely new group of students in the fall.
EVERYONE in the Central Office needs to be replaced!
They need to be replaced not because they have done anything wrong (although some very well may have) but because the school system needs a reboot.
"Ty Ed talk to text is terrible."
...I was blaming "Whole Language".....
Remember, Squeakums, Maria was not the superintendent when you lost your job. That was good ol' Jere, right?
By the way, did you notice that someone was impersonating you on another thread of Larry's blog? The forger missed a few key features, though, and true Squeaky fans would immediately spot it as a fake.
"By the way, did you notice that someone was impersonating you on another thread of Larry's blog? The forger missed a few key features, though, and true Squeaky fans would immediately spot it as a fake."
No Nina I didn't see that. It's definitely flattering.
And you are correct. "good ol'" spineless Jere Hochman was in charge then.
So you're right. I'll shut up about the Geryks. They're none of my business.
I'm sorry.
-Squeaky Squeaks
p.s. Can you forgive me?
I am too old for whole language. Phonics .. I hated learning how to teach whole language.
I just hope things are going better for you now, Squeaky. That's genuine.
Post a Comment