Breach? What Breach?

Attorney Regina W. Tate

So at $225/hour I guess it's a good thing that the Public Schools attorney Regina Tate is so succinct.

Her not overly prompt response to the NAACP complaint about a "substantial breach" of the 1993 "Consent Decree" was certainly short and to the point.

Just say no.

   NAACP complaint Amherst Schools

Sorry About That

 6/24 Regional School Committee meeting

In response to my Open Meeting Law complaint Amherst-Pelham Regional School Committee Chair Lawrence O'Brien has promised to do a better job from now on for "as long as I am serving as Chair."

Which is all well and good, except he was elected Chair at the tumultuous 6/24 meeting but only until the Regional School Committee meets for their cozy little "Retreat" (not the controversial housing project in North Amherst) sometime in August.

Simply put my complaint stemmed from the published written agenda stating they were going into Executive Session to discuss only "Collective Bargaining," when in fact they pulled the cloak of secrecy for a "litigation" discussion instead.

Yes, litigation is a very legitimate reason to go into Executive Session.  But it would be nice to know specifically up front that litigation was the reason rather than giving the false impression it was for rather benign contract negotiations. 

And I get a little nervous when he cites their "district legal counsel" Gini Tate, as she also gives "counsel" to the Wayland School Committee, a serial offender of the Open Meeting Law. 

Public Documents Runaround

(click to enlarge/read)      Public Records appeal response:  late and stingy

Well that only took four months, relatively quick by Public Documents standards -- at least when dealing with the Amherst Public Schools.  And as usual the grudging response is pretty anemic.  Downside for the taxpayers of having a $225/hour school attorney is they have an economic incentive to be obstinate with these simple requests. 

Attorney Regina W. Tate

From: Larry Kelley
To: pre <pre@sec.state.ma.us>; donald.white <donald.white@state.ma.us>
Sent: Sat, Mar 2, 2013 10:20 am
Subject: Public Records Appeal of Amherst Schools

Shawn Williams, Director

Public Records Division

One Ashburton Place, 17th Floor

Boston, MA 02108

Dear Mr. Williams,

I wish to once again appeal the decision of the Amherst Regional Public Schools to stonewall my public documents request for legal settlements that have cost Amherst/Regional taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars.

As you may remember, your office sided with me last year on a previous complaint regarding ARPS settlement agreements with terminated employees totaling over $200,000.  The schools obstinately continue refusing to release those documents.

Now I wish to appeal the 2/26/13 decision of Rob Detweiler, Director of Finance and Operations, to withhold settlement agreements totaling $229,300, from recent "Special Education" legal cases. 

Obviously I understand certain information -- names of students for instance -- should be redacted to protect privacy, but certainly with that much settlement money involved the taxpayers have a right to know how many cases it represents and the details of those cases.

Even if the money was paid by an insurance carrier a Hampshire Superior Court judge found the settlement agreement between the Phoebe Prince family and South Hadley Schools were still a pubic document even though the $225,000 payout came from liability insurance. 

Your office has also repeatedly struck down the concept of "non disclosure agreements" citing Washington Post ., 690 F. 2d at 263 ( a government agency cannot circumvent the Federal Freedom of Information Act with a private agreement).

Please remind the Amherst Regional Public Schools that the general public has a right to know.

Sincerely,

Larry J. Kelley

The Cost of Social Justice

Buses wait for their precious cargo at Crocker Farm School

Amherst Regional Public Schools teach social justice; in fact, some would argue our schools preach social justice.  But when it comes time to actually walk the walk and put money where your mouth is, school leadership acts like a Robber-Baron Scrooge squeezing pennies out of those who can least afford it.

Yes, the highest paid administrator in the most expensive public school in the entire region forced the lowest paid employees in the system--bus drivers and custodians-- to sign a legal gag order to receive $18,840 in total wages they were legally owed after the business office miscalculated annual days worked over the years.

But why such heavy handed secrecy?  Perhaps because other low paid full time staff--secretarial and clerical employees, audio-visual technicians, and media aides--are currently unaware they too were unfairly shortchanged over the years and could also demand equal compensation. 

Astonishing.

The sad back-story told in emails

AFSCME Gag Order Amherst Schools

Legal Dynasty Reestablished

So apparently Superintendent Maria Geryk changed her mind about using Executive Session for the Amherst Regional School Committee  to coronate, errr, I mean rehire Giny Tate, errr, I mean Murphy, Hesse, Toomey and Lehane as ARPS Special Education Legal Counsel after Fred Dupere suddenly resigned earlier this week (although he is still on the payroll until June 30).

The vote was unanimous except for Amilcar Shabazz who abstained.  Voting in favor:  Katherine Appy, Rick Hood, Lawrence O'Brien, Michael DeChiara, Kip Fonsh, Deb Gould.  Annemarie Foley and Rob Spence were Missing In Action.

Ms Tate is now General Counsel for the School Committees and administration as well as Special Education Counsel, a job she was terminated from by a 5-4 Regional School Committee vote on 9/22/2010.  Her most recent Special Ed case, which concluded in March, cost taxpayers just over $40,000 in legal fees. The Bureau of Special Education Appeals found in favor of the pro se (lawyer less) parent.

Interestingly the case would have cost taxpayers twice that in legal fees if the parent had used a lawyer.  Maybe Shakespeare was right...

D-Day at ARPS

 

This afternoon at 4:30 PM Superintendent Maria Geryk and her inside circle of high level (highly paid) administrators will retire to the superintendent's conference room for an important pow-wow with the Amherst Regional School Committee to secretly discuss in executive session the sudden resignation of Special Education Legal Counsel Fred Dupere and, presumably, decide on a replacement, presumably, Gini Tate.

Since the current 9 member Regional School Committee is now different by two easy going Amherst members, the previous (9/22/2010) 5-4 vote to fire Gini Tate as Special Education Counsel can easily be overturned.  And probably will be.  In spite of her recent failure.

Remember that special education case she was grandfathered on to continue litigating (at $220/hour) because according to Regional School Committee Chair Rick Hood, " Tate had already worked extensively on it during the FY11 school year prior to Dupere being appointed the new SE attorney. Probably this is the case you are referring to. 

Where Murphy Hesse Toomey Lehane (Tate's lawfirm) was already deeply involved in a case it was thought best (and less expensive) to keep MHTL on it."

Hmmm...since issuing that statement Gini Tate ran up over $40,000 in Special Education legal services on the case; and guess what? She lost! If Tate was such a great attorney how is it she gets beat by a pro se parent without a law degree? Goes to show how egregious the case was against the schools--and any good altruistic attorney would have counseled their client to that affect.

It's a simple rule really, one that should especially resonate in Amherst:  War is seldom the right answer.

Special Ed Parent Advisory Council recommendation:  Anybody BUT Gini Tate!

Another Major School Shake Up

Fred Dupere, Special Education Counsel for the Amherst Regional Public School system since December, 2010 resigned suddenly, effective June 30.  According to a statement sent out by Interim Director of Student Services Jo Ann Smith, "He indicated that his decision is based upon his current work commitments with other clients in his practice." 
  
In other words he was doing w-a-y more work than expected for a lousy $3,000 month retainer.



The Regional School Committee has scheduled an emergency meeting executive session this Thursday at 4:30 PM at the Regional Middle School with Superintendent Maria Geryk in her private conference room.  How cozy.

Dupere replaced Gini Tate (terminated by a 5-4 Regional School Committee vote on 9/22/10) who stayed on as attorney for all other legal matters at $220/hour.  Well, except for a case or two that she started concerning special education. Those she continues to litigate even though Dupere could have handled them for no additional costs.

In fact, over the first three quarters of this fiscal year--even though fired as Special Education Counsel--Ms. Tate has been paid twice as much as Dupere for her Special Ed services billed to the Regional School District:  $42,472 vs. Dupere's $18,684.  In addition Ms. Tate raked in another $15, 000 for school committee consulting and an addition $32,000 for Human Resources.

Since Ms. Tate is a long-time friend of Superintendent Geryk, and since she already occupied the position of Special Education Counsel--and in fact never really ceased doing it--safe bet she will be the top name on a (very) short list of potential candidates.


Let the coronation commence.

Wasted Legal Expenses

Amherst Regional High School

One of the main reasons cited by the Amherst-Pelham Regional School Committee for hitting the snooze button on deciding later start times for Amherst regional secondary schools was the impact on the already fragile condition of school athletics--underscored by no longer sustainable annual subsidies of $50,000.

Yet this same diffident committee has looked the other way after deciding 18 months ago to fire attorney Giny Tate from "Special Education" matters for the school system. However they allow Tate (or more specifically allow Superintendent Maria Geryk to allow her) to continue litigating an expensive case or two when the other legal provider (Dupere & Dupere) could have handled them for no extra charge.

If Murphy Hesse Toomey & Lehane (Tate's firm) really were all that good, then why does Amherst (according to the state DOE website) spend twice the state average for "legal settlements"?

And this additional superfluous legal expense has already exceeded $42,000 for the first three quarters of the current fiscal year.

Tennis anyone?

FY12 Legal $ Amherst Region

The Attorney General cordially demands

So it comes as no b-i-g surprise that Amherst Regional School Committee Chair Rick Hood trampled yet another Open Government rule by failing to forward to the Attorney General an official response to my 11/23 Open Meeting Law complaint.

After all, in July of 2010--only four months into his school committee tenure--the local District Attorney cited him with an Open Meeting Law violation for deliberating with a quorum of committee members via email.

At least back then he could use the "I'm a newbie" excuse.

Now no longer a rookie, he will have to scramble to comply--no doubt enlisting the aid of $220/hour attorney Gini Tate who already advised ARPS Superintendent Maria Geryk and Human Resource Director Kathy Mazur to ignore a demand from the Division of Public Records to release documents concerning payouts totaling $200,000 to 13 former employees over the past five years.

What does it all mean?

Apparently the ARPS Good Ol' Girls network abhors sunshine. And Rick Hood needs to learn the difference between running a $20 million dollar private yacht company and a $50 million public school kept afloat via tax dollars--the lions share consumed in Amherst, the town built on education.

As South Hadley goes...

ARHS

UPDATE: Phoebe Prince's death cost the insurance company that covers South Hadley $225,000. Not enough. Not nearly enough.

Now that Hampshire Superior Court Judge Mary-Lu Rup has decided in favor of transparency and the "people's right to know" by coming down on the side of--gasp--a blogger who, unlike the mainstream bricks and mortar journalists around the Happy Valley, had the temerity to demand South Hadley officials disclose blood money paid to the family of Phoebe Prince, I'm hoping my stronger case against Amherst School officials will benefit in a collateral way.

Emily Bazelon first filed her request with the Secretary of State Public Records Division and I would bet they found in her favor, as they did with me. But then the South Hadley Schools probably did what Amherst defiantly did with me: refused to comply.

Since the Public Records folks have no enforcement power they would have to turn it over to the Attorney General's office (which I quickly requested they do in my case). They however, sheepishly suggested I take it to Hampshire Superior Court where I'm sure I would win, but only after paying a $275 filing fee.

And the schools will use big city attorney Regina Tate to defend the stonewalling, while we, the taxpayers of Amherst, cover her $225/hourly fee.

Since Ms. Bazelton works for Slate Magazine she can afford the steep up front cover charge, although she was savvy enough to request court costs as part of the settlement.

My original request for any settlement agreements over the past five years between the schools and separated employees costing taxpayers a minimum of $5,000 resulted in 13 cases with a combined cost of $200,000 and unlike South Hadley, not covered by an insurance company.

What kind of message does that send our children when public schools buy their way out of a mistake using taxpayer money, and then spend even more tax dollars trying to keep the secrets buried?

A costly legal maneuver

Amherst's Special Ed legal bill first quarter FY2012

Even though Gini Tate's $225/hour contract was terminated by a 5-4 Regional School Committee vote (9/22/10) for Special Education legal services commencing 12/1/2010, with the contract turned over to Dupere & Dupere for a $36,000 total annual cost, taxpayers recently paid the law firm of Murphy, Hesse, Toomey and Lehane (Ms. Tate's firm)$13,646 for special education legal services for only the first quarter of FY2012.

According to Regional School Committee Chair Rick Hood:

"There were three cases carried over from the transition between Dupere and MHLT (Attorney Tate). Two of the cases have reached conclusion and/or are awaiting the BSEA to issue their decision. The third case was a re-filing of a case where MHLT (Attorney Tate) had already worked extensively on it during the FY11 school year prior to Dupere being appointed the new SE attorney. Probably this is the case you are referring to.

Where MHLT was already deeply involved in a case it was thought best (and less expensive) to keep MHLT on it."

Of course that case he claims attorney Tate being "deeply involved in" had only been filed 11/13/10, less than a month after the Regional School Committee vote to terminate Ms. Tate and only two weeks before the 12/1/10 date of implementation. In fact, the case was withdrawn and refiled April 4, 2011 well after Dupere & Dupere took over.

But no, rather than let the new law firm handle it at no extra cost we have town officials opening a spigot--as though taxpayer money springs from an endless well.

Expensive "internal" copy costs

First thing we do, revive all the lawyers

One of the very few things I like about any of Amherst's fifty some odd boards, committees, commissions or the occasional task force is that they often have on their agenda an open "public comment" period, where the general public can extemporaneously address committee members, ask questions, praise, chastise and generally get things off their chest.

Take for instance the Regional School Committee meeting this evening (a joint Meeting of the Amherst, Pelham and Amherst-Pelham Regional School Committees no less), where a concerned citizen wondered why the Schools would rehire a recently terminated lawyer at $220/hour to handle a complicated case--meaning lots of billable hours--when the current lawyer could handle the extra case for no additional cost?

Good question.
#########################################

Good Evening,

I am Michael Aronson, Amherst taxpayer.

I was forwarded an email written by Mr. Hood on Monday August 8 expressing his opinion that it was - “less expensive” to hire an outside attorney to litigate a Special Education matter even though the School District has a pre paid contract with an “In House” attorney.

I don’t know where you learned math, Mr. Hood, but I can assure you that the $3000 dollars you pay your in-house lawyer per month is less than that $3000 dollars PLUS the fees for an outside attorney hired to do the same thing.

EVERY MEMBER OF THIS COMMITTEE should be up in arms about the administrative decision to waste precious education dollars in this way.

Mr. Hood, as Chairman of this committee, you should be making very public inquiries into why the decision to hire an outside attorney was made.

Tell us, WHO is responsible for this violation of the public trust and why you consider it acceptable?

Your negligence, and that of the administrator who made this decision is hurting our children and our community.

This is shameful, malfeasance, and terrible policy.

Parents who come to Amherst for their children’s education, and pay handsomely in taxes for the privilege, are appalled at the tremendous waste this kind of decision represents.

Let us be clear, you have failed them.

Thank you for your time.
######################################
I of course asked Mr. Aronson (since I was not there) how committee members received his forthright statement. Apparently not very well:

To the School Committee:

Knowing full well that the School committee is fully committed to denying any possibility of error in its judgments, I send to you and all contacts on this list my response to Mr. Rhodes and Ms. Luschen's full throated defense of administrative malfeasance.

Mr. Rhodes and Ms. Luschen argued that Amherst administrators need retain the duplicative legal services of Regina Tate due to her familiarity with existing legal cases. This argument is spurious on a number of grounds.

1) Ms. Tate was removed from her position litigating Special Education in Amherst because a majority of the School Committee found her services deficient. If you want to know the “cause” of her dismissal, ask those who voted to remove her - including Mr. Rhodes.

2) There is evidence that the historic case to which they referred at tonight's meeting was filed on 1 December 2010 - the same day Dupere was hired under a fixed contract. In other words, Tate did not have time to become too familiar with this case. It was filed on the same day she lost the contract to Dupere.

3) Litigants often change attorneys. There is ample precedent for one attorney taking over a case from another in situations far more complicated than those of Special Education. Special Education cases are limited in legal complexity, and are even outside of the normal judicial process. If Amherst wanted their new attorney to be informed about existing cases, they should have hired Tate to brief Dupere on those cases. That type of legal expense would have been unimpeachable. That in which the District now engages is profligate.

The Regional School Committee is entering perilous territory. Any outside observer would characterize such wasteful use of educational resources for unnecessary litigation that you explicitly condone (and defend) as a failure of fiduciary responsibility. Just ask the 9th grader who needs extra help in math, or kids who can't take AP Physics for a lack of a qualified teacher.

We all should ask, is the committee incapable of seeing the truth, are you at all interested in working to improve this district ?

At this time the answer is a resounding "No!" As a body you are rejecting of the facts on the ground.

And our community suffers.

Michael Aronson

What price public documents?

Shawn Williams, Assistant Director
Public Records Division
McCormack Building, Room 1719
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108

8/22/2011

Dear Mr. Williams,

First off, my sincere condolences on the loss of Director Alan Cote. He was a true champion of keeping records open and available to the general public, a thankless and--unfortunately in Massachusetts--never ending job.

I'm aware your office seldom refers matters to the Attorney General for further action these days, but I'm requesting you do exactly that with the case of the Amherst Schools obstinately defying your order to produce 13 settlement agreements with public employees costing Amherst taxpayers $200,000 over the past five years.

As I understand it only two options now exist for overcoming this willful roadblock: referring the matter to the AG by your office for enforcement of your original order, or I can bring the matter to Superior Court such as the Boston Globe has done with an almost identical case.

Unfortunately option #2 will cost me $275 plus the additional cost as an Amherst taxpayer when the schools use attorney Regina Tate at $220/hour to defend their case.

It seems the Amherst Schools are using South Hadley as an example for doing the public's business: as secretly as possible. Please, do not allow them to be rewarded for this unethical pattern of behavior.

Sincerely Yours,

Larry Kelley
596 South Pleasant St
Amherst, Ma 01002
413 256-0491

Call in the Cavalry

Alan Cote, Supervisor of Records
Office of the Secretary of the Commonwealth
McCormack Building, Room 1719
One Ashburton Place
Boston, MA 02108
8/15/2011

Dear Mr. Cote,

I am requesting further assistance from the Public Records Division concerning my previous public documents request of the Amherst Schools for employee settlement agreements over the past five years with a value greater than $5,000.

In a 7/20/2011 letter to the Amherst schools your office, responding to my 4/7/11 appeal request, found in my favor saying, "The school has failed to show that the responsive separation agreements include personal information sufficient enough to withhold the agreements in their entirety under Exemption (C)."

On 8/2/2011 I met with Amherst School Superintendent Maria Geryk and Human Resources Director Kathy Mazur to pick up the documents. The Amherst officials, however, refused to provide any of the 13 settlement agreements, offering instead a "summary" with no names, job titles, dates or any other information besides the total amount of each individual settlement (document attached).

Could your office please issue another administrative order clarifying for the schools how to properly comply with your original order to provide the settlement agreements in question? As always, thank you for working to maintain transparency within our government.

Larry Kelley
596 South Pleasant St.
Amherst, Ma 01002

Settlement Agreement Summary

Legal Shuffle

According to the Regional School Committee 9/22/10 minutes, "By a vote of five to four, the committee voted to hire Dupere and Dupere to provide the district’s legal representation for Special Education services."

On 11/30/10 a concerned parent asked the Regional School Committee why Gini Tate was still serving as Special Education counsel for the region: "Mr. Rhodes explained that the School Committee had to negotiate an agreement with the new Special Education attorney, which then had to be ratified by each School Committee. As a result, the contract with the new firm does not begin until December 1, 2010." Of course that was the very next day--or so you would think.

Meanwhile in another part of the space time continuum, on 11/13/10 to be exact--three weeks after the school committee vote to--effectively fire attorney Tate as Special Education counsel, a parent filed suit against the Amherst school district.

Dupere and Dupere started on December 1st at a fixed, all-you-can-litigate, annual cost of $36,000. The first official response to the parent filing suit from Attorney Tate's office concerning the case is dated--you guessed it--December 1st. Pretty quick response for an attorney, eh?

So, rather than having Dupere handle the matter at no additional cost to the taxpayers, the schools--in violation of a School Committee vote--hire attorney Tate, at $220/hour fee plus four hour round trip travel time from her office in Quincy.

The parent who filed suit on November 13 withdrew the action, then refiled on April 4, 2011, using a different legal approach thus providing yet another technical reason Dupere should be handling the case at no additional taxpayer cost.

I asked Regional School Committee chair Rick Hood for an explanation and received this curious response:

"There were three cases carried over from the transition between Dupere and MHLT (Attorney Tate). Two of the cases have reached conclusion and/or are awaiting the BSEA to issue their decision. The third case was a re-filing of a case where MHLT (Attorney Tate) had already worked extensively on it during the FY11 school year prior to Dupere being appointed the new SE attorney. Probably this is the case you are referring to.

Where MHLT was already deeply involved in a case it was thought best (and less expensive) to keep MHLT on it."

Less expensive? You can tell Mr. Hood has an extensive background with yachting! How could Attorney Tate have "worked extensively" or have been "deeply involved" on a case that was originally filed on November 13 with her initial response dated December 1, only two-and-a-half weeks later?

Obviously attorney Tate became a comfortable fixture in the Good Ol' Girls Network now controlling the schools, and since taxpayers unknowingly cover the tab, she's darn well going to stay--no matter the additional expense.

But how do you put a price on trust?

########################################

To: amherstac
Cc: Maria Geryk ; Kathy Mazur ; Mary Wallace
Sent: Fri, Aug 5, 2011 11:22 am

Good Morning, Mr. Kelley:

I'm happy to provide the information you requested. The hourly rate for services provided by Murphy, Hesse, Toomey and Lehane (Ms. Tate's firm) is $220.00. The School Committee vote to hire Dupere and Dupere for the districts' Special Education services and Murphy, Hesse, Toomey and Lehane for the districts' general counsel was taken on September 22, 2010. I've attached the minutes for your convenience.

Best,

Debbie

Debbie Westmoreland
Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent


You would think that somebody on this Cc list knew all too well that Ms. Tate was still involved in a Special Education case, and could have clarified this response.

The cost of doing business?

We have already learned recently that the Amherst schools spent $200,000 in "settlements" with former employees over the past five years (not counting costly unemployment benefits); but with our municipal education machine being such a large local employer, maybe not such a bad batting average.

And maybe in the long run those settlements saved money or helped maintain the integrity of the system, as the women in charge would argue. In fact, they maintain it's usually a combination of both those rationals and that argument would probably be applied to any and all "legal expenses."

How unfortunate that a system designed to educate all our children spends tax dollars on litigation...but a necessary evil, perhaps.

After all, the Amherst schools account for over two-thirds of the entire town budget, or $49 million last year between elementary and regional high school.

Still, do they have to spend so much?

Legal Expenditures

Amherst-Pelham Regional School District:

	FY09	FY10	FY11
School Committee	15,802	17,330	32,315
Human Resources (personnel)	5,123	5,714	6,446
Special Education - MHT&L	49,443	27,315	41,911
	70,368	50,359	80,672

Amherst Public Schools:

	FY09	FY10	FY11
School Committee	9,728	24,763	25,077
Human Resources (personnel)	8,255	5,464	5,854
Special Education - MHT&L	17,112	3,733	14,729
	35,095	33,960	45,660

########################################

8/4/2011 9:48 AM

Could I please get Attorney Tate's current hourly rate and total amount paid in FY10 and FY11 by the School District?

And for clarification: was she terminated from handling school district SPED cases as of December 2010?

Larry K

To: amherstac
Cc: Maria Geryk ; Kathy Mazur ; Mary Wallace
Sent: Fri, Aug 5, 2011 11:22 am

Good Morning, Mr. Kelley:

I'm happy to provide the information you requested. The hourly rate for services provided by Murphy, Hesse, Toomey and Lehane (Ms. Tate's firm) is $220.00. The School Committee vote to hire Dupere and Dupere for the districts' Special Education services and Murphy, Hesse, Toomey and Lehane for the districts' general counsel was taken on September 22, 2010. I've attached the minutes for your convenience.

Best,

Debbie

Debbie Westmoreland
Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent

My Meet-and-Greet with Maria

So no, Attorney Regina Tate was not present for our mid-afternoon pow-wow yesterday in the Superintendent's office...well, at least not in a physical sense. But her spiritual presence was overpowering.

Under additional $220/hour advice from Attorney Tate, the schools defied the official ruling of the state Public Records Division by continuing to withhold the (13) employee settlement agreements.

What little they did give me indicates payouts of almost $200,000 over the past five years.

Settlement Agreement Summary Click link

Detention?

From: Kathy Mazur
To: amherstac@aol.com
Sent: Fri, Jul 29, 2011 2:07 pm
Subject: Tuesday

Hi Larry - Can you please meet with Maria and me at 3 pm next Tuesday? I expect to have the settlement information ready at that time, and Maria and I would like to be able to answer any questions you might have, as well as have an opportunity for us to provide some context for the settlements. Thanks, Kathy
##############################################

I feel a bit like the petulant school child sent to the principal's office for discipline, or what the Chinese government refers to as "retraining." Stimulates not-so-fond memories from St. Michael's Catholic school in Northampton, where the first line of offense was a brief stay in the cramped cloakroom.

Of course the ironic thing about the Amherst Schools trying to keep these settlement agreements with public employees secret is that by taking flawed legal advice from Attorney Tate and resisting my initial public documents request they have only attracted additional attention to the matter.

Furthermore, had I not published the formal finding from the Public Documents Division spelling out the Schools' mistake, a reader would not have seen the opportunity to forward me documentation regarding the other recent incident where the Schools, acting on bad legal advice, withheld the resume of the "interim" Director of Special Education, thereby earning yet another reprimand from state officials.

Rather than spend taxpayer money on bad legal advice, perhaps the Schools--a $50 million enterprise--should hire an entry level Public Relations advisor to spin positive stories and prevent recurrence of these embarrassing faux pas.

Just say NO

I'm not the only one Attorney Regina Tate advises her client--the Amherst Schools--to deny access to public documents.

Back in March parents with a vested interest in Special Education requested the credentials and certifications of the "interim" (going on two years now) Director of Special Education JoAnn Smith, a $99,612 salaried public employee very much in the "public eye".

Under advice of Nancy Reagan--I mean-- Attorney Regina Tate, the Amherst schools refused to comply by invoking "exception C", the privacy exemption.The petitioner appealed to the Public Records Division and received a telling response earlier this month from staff attorney Lori Sullivan:

I have received your inquiry on the status of your public records appeal. A review of the matter reveals that the Amherst Pelham School District (School District) is withholding teacher and staff credentials/certifications. Our office will have to send an administrative order to the School District to try to get them to comply with the request. Once it is drafted and reviewed by the Assistant Director, it will be mailed to both the School District and to you.

According to easily accessed public records information available online: "Specifically, any relevant degrees and certifications listed on an employee’s resume may be subject to disclosure upon request. Public employees have a diminished expectation of privacy in matters relating to their public employment and the public has a legitimate interest in knowing whether public employees possess the qualifications necessary to perform their jobs."

Seems pretty simply to me. But then, I'm not an expensive Big City lawyer.

"A paramount and prevailing right to know"

Click photos to enlarge/read

Let's hope Amherst Schools' attorney Regina Tate is embarrassed enough by the Public Records Division's official ruling to perhaps feel guilty about billing the client--'We the People'--for such bad advice.

After all, town attorney Joel Bard, a principal with Boston law firm Kopelman and Paige, perused my duplicate request to Town Hall a few months before the Schools and correctly advised Town Manager John Musante to turn over all the requested documents.

I especially like the Public Documents pros addressing the issue of municipal employees outside the "public eye". Attorney Tate seems to think that anything happening beyond the "public eye"--i.e. under cover of darkness--should stay forever buried.

All of those secret deals are now in the realm of the undead.